No home charging option for first year of Model Y

[psingh]

Hi All, I have booked my Model Y and estimated delivery is in May 2022. I don’t have home charging available in my condo. So for initial period could be 10-12 months I might be using super chargers mostly. I average 12000 miles during that time so approximately 50 times of supercharging in an year. Do you think it will degrade the battery performance in long run. Service advisor says it’s totally fine but wanted to seek advice from experienced people.

Thanks

 

[tccartier]

Level 2 chargers while you dine, shop or exercise are typically a joke. They are often low wattage. The only level 2 chargers worth your time are at hotels, airports or work where you’ll spend a long time.

There is one in front of Wegmans always busy. Not worth the time to plug in.

I don't think they're a joke. If you're already going to be there and your car is going to be parked for some length of time anyway . It's not like you're waiting for it, so any gain should be a plus. Not sure why absolute all out speed is a necessity, or the charger or charging location would be considered junk. Just my 02

 

[Rocky_H]

Just saying “because Tesla said so” doesn’t answer my question though. There must be some kind of scientific reason, or at least empiric proof of that, right?

Yes, there is. It's one of the common principles of battery recharging that smaller discharge and recharge events are less stress and degradation than running it way down and then doing a really long, deep, continuous recharge.

I guess my question is: if you use 15% a day, but you charge every day back to 80%, doesn’t that increase the number of cycles, essentially balancing out the other aspect? Meaning if you charge back from 65 to 80 every day, you’ll reach the 1000 cycles 4 times faster than if you charge every 4 days from 20% to 80%, right?

No, because that's not how a battery "cycle" is defined. You are thinking of charging "events", which is not the same as a cycle.

In battery studies and statistics, a cycle consists of the entire capacity of the battery--100% of it--depleted and refilled. So if you run 1/2 of the battery out and refill that twice, that is one cycle. If you run down 10% and then refill that and do that 10 times, that is also a cycle. So no, you aren't running through "cycles" much faster by doing that in smaller pieces.

But as you can see, not every cycle is the same. If they are deeper discharge and recharge ones, those are harder. If they are done in hotter temperatures, those are harder. If they are done with extremely high power, those are harder, etc. So that's hard to use one generalization about X battery can do Y number of cycles. How the cycles are done will impact that.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Yes, there is. It's one of the common principles of battery recharging that smaller discharge and recharge events are less stress and degradation than running it way down and then doing a really long, deep, continuous recharge.

Actually that depends on a lot of factors and is not a universal rule.

For NMC chemistry as used in Tesla, the research papers I've read seem to support that the worst thing for the pack is holding it at very high state of charge for long periods of time. That's more important than any count of "cycles" or the range of charging on them.

Using the battery from 80% to 20% for the week is far easier on the battery than running it from 100% to 92% each day.

 

[pacman3000]

Actually that depends on a lot of factors and is not a universal rule.

For NMC chemistry as used in Tesla, the research papers I've read seem to support that the worst thing for the pack is holding it at very high state of charge for long periods of time. That's more important than any count of "cycles" or the range of charging on them.

Using the battery from 80% to 20% for the week is far easier on the battery than running it from 100% to 92% each day.

ZenRockGarden, I think Rocky_H is simply referring to the smaller cycles are safer for the battery…. via smaller recharge/discharge and regen. The car clearly warns you when you try to charge above 90%. Tesla clearly does not want you to store the car with a high state of charge… as regen and efficiency drop at some point above 90%.

I think the lesson is to reduce the depth of discharge. Running the battery from 80-70% regularly is far easier on the battery than running deeper cycles like 80-20%.

Obviously, driving with a lead foot (while it may be fun) is probably not too good on the battery or drivetrain with the higher Wh/mi utilization.

Doing smaller cycles is recommended, but degradation % difference may be moot. So, it really depends on the driver and their situation… and really pointless to debate as long as everyone can agree on what is truly bad for the batteries:
1) deep cycles should be avoided
2) never store a Tesla charged above 90%
3) never store a Tesla below 20%
4) try to keep regular depth of discharge within 50% or less.
5) how often you charge your tesla is up to you, no substantial evidence supports any detrimental effects linked to how ‘often’ a Tesla is charged (Tesloop). Just follow the recommendations and avoid any extremes. Enjoy the car.
6) Precondition the battery prior to driving in colder climates

 

[ZenRockGarden]

ZenRockGarden, I think Rocky_H is simply referring to the smaller cycles are safer for the battery…. via smaller recharge/discharge and regen. The car clearly warns you when you try to charge above 90%. Tesla clearly does not want you to store the car with a high state of charge… as regen and efficiency drop at some point above 90%.

I think the lesson is to reduce the depth of discharge. Running the battery from 80-70% regularly is far easier on the battery than running deeper cycles like 80-20%.

Obviously, driving with a lead foot (while it may be fun) is probably not too good on the battery or drivetrain with the higher Wh/mi utilization.

Doing smaller cycles is recommended, but degradation % difference may be moot. So, it really depends on the driver and their situation… and really pointless to debate as long as everyone can agree on what is truly bad for the batteries:
1) deep cycles should be avoided
2) never store a Tesla charged above 90%
3) never store a Tesla below 20%
4) try to keep regular depth of discharge within 50% or less.
5) how often you charge your tesla is up to you, no substantial evidence supports any detrimental effects linked to how ‘often’ a Tesla is charged (Tesloop). Just follow the recommendations and avoid any extremes. Enjoy the car.
6) Precondition the battery prior to driving in colder climates

I totally agree there are a wide range of behaviors which can affect long term battery health.

I disagree with pushing the idea that "smaller discharge cycles" are universally superior, and I offered a trivial example to the contrary.

If you go deeper into the 6 topics you list, you will find that holding an NMC battery at high state of charge utterly dwarfs any concern over how deep a cycle you put on it. It's actually good to park your car overnight at a much lower state of charge if you know you don't need big range the next day. running 70-80% is NOT inherently better for the pack than (trivial example) running it from 20% to 50%.

There's precious little evidence supporting the many-small-cycles theory over fewer-larger-cycles, especially if you simply avoid holding a high state of charge. Disagree? Bring evidence!

Show us any scientific evidence supporting lots of shallow recharge cycles resulting in less battery degredation compared to fewer larger cycles that stay at or below the same max charge level.

 

[ATPMSD]

Meaning if you charge back from 65 to 80 every day, you’ll reach the 1000 cycles 4 times faster than if you charge every 4 days from 20% to 80%

So with the caveat that this test is not with a Tesla battery, each "C" is one discharge and recharge cycle. So yes, it will accmulate cycles about 4-times faster. I must point out there is some debate as to what constitutes a "cycle" but this is the general idea.

 

[DanDi58]

Just saying “because Tesla said so” doesn’t answer my question though. There must be some kind of scientific reason, or at least empiric proof of that, right?
Unless we’re just supposed to take Tesla’s word as gospel, in which case I must be missing all the Cybertrucks delivered in 2021 in the streets, as well as all the 4680 batteries.

Hey, as I said, you can choose to do whatever you want. But I assume Tesla has very valid reasons (and research) behind them over their last 14 years of manufacturing EV's to know what's what.

 

[pacman3000]

I totally agree there are a wide range of behaviors which can affect long term battery health.

I disagree with pushing the idea that "smaller discharge cycles" are universally superior, and I offered a trivial example to the contrary.

If you go deeper into the 6 topics you list, you will find that holding an NMC battery at high state of charge utterly dwarfs any concern over how deep a cycle you put on it. It's actually good to park your car overnight at a much lower state of charge if you know you don't need big range the next day. running 70-80% is NOT inherently better for the pack than (trivial example) running it from 20% to 50%.

There's precious little evidence supporting the many-small-cycles theory over fewer-larger-cycles, especially if you simply avoid holding a high state of charge. Disagree? Bring evidence!

Show us any scientific evidence supporting lots of shallow recharge cycles resulting in less battery degredation compared to fewer larger cycles that stay at or below the same max charge level.

Maybe I am missing the point you are trying to make?

There is plenty of evidence out there that suggests smaller cycles are better for li-ion batteries than larger cycles… provided the starting state of charge is the same. Deep cycles (wider depth of discharge) typically will result in fewer cycles before degradation capacity reaches less than 70%.

BU-808: How to Prolong Lithium-based Batteries

BU meta description needed...

batteryuniversity.com

New Tests Prove: LFP Lithium Batteries Live Longer than NMC - OneCharge

Recent independent degradation tests of commercial lithium batteries prove - LFP chemistry is safer and has a longer life-span than NMC.

www.onecharge.biz

The li-ion batteries thrive on smaller rates of charge/discharge. People that fixate on the ‘number of charging/discharging cycles’ might want to think about wherr ‘regen’ falls into their logic.

Temperature will definitely be a more important factor in all of this discussion. But again, I think everyone just needs to enjoy their car. Outside of the 90kWh packs, most Tesla battery packs exhibit pretty stable degradation.

The BMS is managing the battery health, and will do its best in any given scenario. Tesla has several safeguards/messages that notify the user (i.e if you charge over 90%, if you engage ludicrous+, etc.)

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Maybe I am missing the point you are trying to make?

There is plenty of evidence out there that suggests smaller cycles are better for li-ion batteries than larger cycles… provided the starting state of charge is the same. Deep cycles (wider depth of discharge) typically will result in fewer cycles before degradation capacity reaches less than 70%.

BU-808: How to Prolong Lithium-based Batteries

BU meta description needed...

batteryuniversity.com

New Tests Prove: LFP Lithium Batteries Live Longer than NMC - OneCharge

Recent independent degradation tests of commercial lithium batteries prove - LFP chemistry is safer and has a longer life-span than NMC.

www.onecharge.biz

The li-ion batteries thrive on smaller rates of charge/discharge. People that fixate on the ‘number of charging/discharging cycles’ might want to think about wherr ‘regen’ falls into their logic.

Temperature will definitely be a more important factor in all of this discussion. But again, I think everyone just needs to enjoy their car. Outside of the 90kWh packs, most Tesla battery packs exhibit pretty stable degradation.

The BMS is managing the battery health, and will do its best in any given scenario. Tesla has several safeguards/messages that notify the user (i.e if you charge over 90%, if you engage ludicrous+, etc.)

My point is that a larger number of small charging cycles in the upper range of an NMC battery are NOT better than a smaller number of charge cycles that cover the wider mid range of the battery.

You seem distracted by the RATE of charging, which is not involved here.

 

[pacman3000]

My point is that a larger number of small charging cycles in the upper range of an NMC battery are NOT better than a smaller number of charge cycles that cover the wider mid range of the battery.

You seem distracted by the RATE of charging, which is not involved here.

I wasnt distracted by the rate of charge, just trying to get to the bottom of your point… which I think I get now…

If you are talking about the DoD being the EXACT same cycle size and just comparing at which capacity the cycle occurs. A 10% cycle would probably be bettery for the battery at 40-50% vs 80-90%.

I thought you were saying this:
Driver A with 70-30% cycle is being easier on his battery than a
Driver B with an 80-75% cycle.

Just because Driver B has a slightly higher state of charge… does not mean the battery will be worse-off. Since his cycle is smaller, and still within the safe range… I think this driver’s battery will be happier in the long run.

Trying to gauge exactly how much degradation a person experiences after 3-4 years between the two scenarios may be mere percentages. I understand why people are passionate over this level of detail though. We will see how much of this data goes out the window, if/when solid-state batteries ever make its way into the mainstream market.

My point is this: People that own the Performance models want their car battery at a higher state of charge (within the safe range) so they have the output available to them. If this is at the expense of getting 8-10 miles less range per full capacity after 200k miles of of driving… I’m sure they will not be bothered.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

We mostly agree, but differ on this:

>Just because Driver B has a slightly higher state of charge… does not mean the battery will be worse-off. Since his cycle is smaller, and still within the safe range… I think this driver’s battery will be happier in the long run.

It depends on chemistry, but NMC really does experience increased degredation staying anywhere above 40% state of charge. It accelerates at 60% and gets worst above 90% hence Tesla actively telling people to avoid spending time there. The common-practice is to keep it between 20%-80%, but this is just a simplification. In reality, if you're super concerned with degredation, you want to keep NMC batteries under 50% as often as possible, which ironically longer charging cycles more typically tend to do.

LFP chemistry is different and is much less sensitive to state of charge - it'll happily sit at 100% and Tesla cars with LFP batteries do not have the advisories about charging to a high level.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

I'll simplify my claim.

You prefer lots of small cycles from 70% to 80%.

I favor fewer total cycles staying in the range of 30% to 60% without concern over cycle depth.

Neither one will make a ton of difference - Tesla packs hold up really well. But depth-of-cycle isn't a concern - in fact cycle-count is more important than depth as long as you stay in the middle range.

 

[ATPMSD]

OK, let’s step back from this for a moment. A lot of people have good suggestion but in truth the only ones who really know the real answer is Tesla, and their stance is:

• Maintain a regular, every-day charging routine using a low-voltage charger (i.e. Wall Connector at your home). Avoid allowing the battery to get too low in charge.

Here is the link to the “official” page:

Range Tips | Tesla Support UAE

Your Tesla vehicle continuously monitors its energy level and proximity to known charging locations to provide range assurance. To maximize efficiency, it is important to know the factors that impact range and the recommended ways to reduce energy consumption.

www.tesla.com

The only real “sin” is letting the SOC get to 0% - never, never, never do this!

 

[tccartier]

Well I for one just charge my car as much or as little or as often or I seldom as I need to to get where I'm going. I just drive it like an ordinary car. If the battery lasts great if it doesn't I'll get another one or get another car. Not abusing it mind you, just using it as I need to. It's supposed to work for me. That's the way I see it anyhow.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

works for rme