Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[faughtz]

... If they did know what the range/performance impact would be and went ahead with it anyway, that says a lot about the total disregard toward their most loyal customers.

Are you new around here?
“Misrepresentation” is tesla’s middle name.

 

[Droschke]

Are you new around here?
“Misrepresentation” is tesla’s middle name.

The pain is real. So is hope ...

 

[CuriousG]

The pain is real. So is hope ...

Since Elon is a fan of Rick and Morty and The Simpsons, this sums up Tesla phone and chat support.

 

[Skipdd]

New article today possibly related

Tesla says single battery module caused car fire in Shanghai, has changed vehicle settings
Reuters

Electric vehicle (EV) maker Tesla Inc said on Friday a single battery module caused a car to catch fire in Shanghai and it had revised its vehicle settings to further protect its batteries following an investigation into the incident. Read the full story

Not sure link will work

 

[Matias]

New article today possibly related

Tesla says single battery module caused car fire in Shanghai, has changed vehicle settings
Reuters

Electric vehicle (EV) maker Tesla Inc said on Friday a single battery module caused a car to catch fire in Shanghai and it had revised its vehicle settings to further protect its batteries following an investigation into the incident. Read the full story

Not sure link will work

”The company has revised the charge and thermal management settings on Model S and Model X vehicles via an over-the-air (OTA) software update, to help further protect the battery and improve battery longevity, the statement said.”

 

[Droschke]

New article today possibly related

Tesla says single battery module caused car fire in Shanghai, has changed vehicle settings
Reuters

Electric vehicle (EV) maker Tesla Inc said on Friday a single battery module caused a car to catch fire in Shanghai and it had revised its vehicle settings to further protect its batteries following an investigation into the incident. Read the full story

Not sure link will work

Thanks for posting the new article.

The Reuters story, June 28, 2019:
"The company has revised the charge and thermal management settings on Model S and Model X vehicles via an over-the-air (OTA) software update, to help further protect the battery and improve battery longevity, the statement said."

The electrek story, June 20, 2019:
Tesla told us that the goal of the update is to “protect the battery and improve battery longevity”.

 

[faughtz]

Thanks for posting the new article.

The Reuters story, June 28, 2019:
"The company has revised the charge and thermal management settings on Model S and Model X vehicles via an over-the-air (OTA) software update, to help further protect the battery and improve battery longevity, the statement said."

The electrek story, June 20, 2019:
Tesla told us that the goal of the update is to “protect the battery and improve battery longevity”.

At the cost of reducing both purchased range and purchased performance.

 

[TJtv]

What does it even mean when they say "a single battery module caused a car to catch fire"? Isn't that obvious? Fires tend to start at a single point and then ignite the rest of the fuel as they continue to burn. If you light a campfire the whole thing doesn't immediately become an inferno, you first light a small piece of kindling which spreads to smaller sticks and then eventually to logs. Was anyone really expecting something other than "a single module" being the root cause of the fire?

 

[Droschke]

What does it even mean when they say "a single battery module caused a car to catch fire"? Isn't that obvious? Fires tend to start at a single point and then ignite the rest of the fuel as they continue to burn. If you light a campfire the whole thing doesn't immediately become an inferno, you first light a small piece of kindling which spreads to smaller sticks and then eventually to logs. Was anyone really expecting something other than "a single module" being the root cause of the fire?

You are correct. My best guess would be they are carefully selecting and leveraging the word "single" in their advantage, i.e., yes there was a fire but was caused only by a "single" module. The general public, non-EV savvy reaction would then be:

Oh, it wasn't that bad since was only a one module ... the rest were not faulty then ...

Like you said, we still do not know the root cause.

 

[flyingpenguins]

Ask about the voltage difference. Miles are calculated, voltage is simply read from direct values without needing to hedge math. A reduction in pack voltage at 100% is either intentional or a sign of failure. There is no in between, degradation doesn't reduce voltage drastically.

Chaserr can you explain the battery voltage issue? I was under the impression that batteries at the end of their usable life tend to have a slight decrease in voltage due to increased internal resistance. This is readily quantified. What implication does the 100% SOC voltage have?

 

[fbitz777]

As a side note the Bolt and some kind of similar software update back in 2017 to the BMS software but that was limited to only a small batch of a few hundred cars. I don't think it limited the range though.

 

[IngTH]

I was under the impression that batteries at the end of their usable life tend to have a slight decrease in voltage due to increased internal resistance. This is readily quantified. What implication does the 100% SOC voltage have?

The decrease of voltage due to higer cell impedance you just measure when the pack is discharged (with higher amperage), but OCV is unchanged. NCA tends to higher cathode impedance with aging (the lattice structure will partially be converted to rock-salt structure of the metal-oxide which is an electric isolator)

But the main reason why the EOCV is reduced is to guarantee the stability of the cathode in a cell which has lost cycleable Li due to aging processes. NCA can react in a severe way when its delithiated beyond 55-60%!!!

 

[Droschke]

The decrease of voltage due to higer cell impedance you just measure when the pack is discharged (with higher) amperage, but OCV is unchanged. NCA tends to higher cathode impedance with aging (the lattice structure will partially be converted to rock-salt structure of the metal-oxide which is an electric isolator)

But the main reason why the EOCV is reduced is to guarantee the stability of the cathode in a cell which has lost cycleable Li due to aging processes. NCA can react in a severe way when its delitiated beyond 55-60%!!!

What does this mean? For the owners who are not battery engineers, would you simplify your post so everyone can better understand? There are lots of acronyms here

Thanks.

 

[jimisbell]

I am a new member here. I own a 2000 Honda Insight Hybrid and will be upgrading to a Tesla. At least I hope its an upgrade. I know the Tesla wont get the 70 miles a gallon the Honda gets (or the equivalent in electricity) but its a 4 place car not a 2 place car.
I have been reading about the loss in range. Is it a REAL loss in range? Has anyone tested it to see what the range actually is? Or is it just a software reported range based on computer guesswork?

 

[Dr. J]

I own a 2000 Honda Insight Hybrid and will be upgrading to a Tesla. At least I hope its an upgrade. I know the Tesla wont get the 70 miles a gallon the Honda gets (or the equivalent in electricity)

Teslas laugh at 70 MPG! Tesla Model 3 gets higher 134 MPGe efficiency with new battery pack, Hyundai Ioniq still king - Electrek

 

[Droschke]

I know the Tesla wont get the 70 miles a gallon the Honda gets (or the equivalent in electricity)

Not correct. Tesla's eMPG's are way much higher than that. Google it.

Is it a REAL loss in range?

Range loss for some impacted cars. Not fake.

Has anyone tested it to see what the range actually is?

Yes. Read the whole thread.

Or is it just a software reported range based on computer guesswork?

Read the whole thread.

 

[DJRas]

More information from much data gathering and analysis on MY 2014 S 85.
I only have CANBUS data from the last 10 days or so. Nothing from prior to 2016.16.1.1
The terms below are from ScanMyTesla app

The car displayed "Energy (%)" is taken from rounding the Usable 100* Usable Remaining kWh divided by Usable Full Pack kWh (ie 71% = 100 * 42.8/60.3). The display is rounded up 73.5% is displayed as 74%

The Rated Range is In the CANBUS data in ScanMyTesla and on MY car = Usable Remaining kWh divided by ~0.276 kWh/Mi (155=42.8/0.276)

The SOC does not easily correlate to battery voltage since under load and while charging are distorted by those actions.
I BELIEVE the Usable Remaining is calculated by accumulating the instantaneous kW in and out over the scan time (thus integrating "area under the curve").

The Usable Full Pack and Usable Remaining are simply Nominal Full Pack - 4 (Energy Buffer) and Nominal Remaining -4.

The Nominal Full Pack value is a bit of a mystery. I have seen mine vary from 64.3 to 64.5 (though this is an 85kWh pack).
I know people say our 85kWh packs were "really 81kWh".
Is that 85kWh minus the 4kWh Energy Buffer thus 81kWh USABLE?
Or, were they 81kWh packs with 77kWh USABLE?

Based on my current data from the car I have now 64.3kWh nominal battery (60.3 usable).
On May 13 with my 100% range of 247 I have a USABLE Battery of 68.2kWh (at 276Wh/mi)
So, the updates 2019.16.11 and 2019.16.2 REDUCED my Nominal Full Pack from 72.2 to 64.3 - a loss of ~8kWh.

Sometime the Rated Range multiplier has been changed (I have no idea when).
Initially the S 85 was rated for 265 miles (85kwh/265mi = 320Wh/mi)
NOW the multiplier on MY car is 276Wh/mi.
My average ACTUAL usage for the last 6 months is 316Wh/mi (7,793.7kWh / 24654.0 miles since Jan1, 2019)

TMSpy displays SOC based on Nominal Remaining divided by Nominal Full Pack (leaving our the 4kWh Energy buffer).

Comments welcome!

 

[IngTH]

What does this mean? For the owners who are not battery engineers, would you simplify you post so everyone can better understand?

Some of the problems you encounter right now are related to NCA cathode chemistry. No other (renown) manufacturer is using NCA!

 

[Droschke]

More information from much data gathering and analysis on MY 2014 S 85.
I only have CANBUS data from the last 10 days or so. Nothing from prior to 2016.16.1.1
The terms below are from ScanMyTesla app

The car displayed "Energy (%)" is taken from rounding the Usable 100* Usable Remaining kWh divided by Usable Full Pack kWh (ie 71% = 100 * 42.8/60.3). The display is rounded up 73.5% is displayed as 74%

The Rated Range is In the CANBUS data in ScanMyTesla and on MY car = Usable Remaining kWh divided by ~0.276 kWh/Mi (155=42.8/0.276)

The SOC does not easily correlate to battery voltage since under load and while charging are distorted by those actions.
I BELIEVE the Usable Remaining is calculated by accumulating the instantaneous kW in and out over the scan time (thus integrating "area under the curve").

The Usable Full Pack and Usable Remaining are simply Nominal Full Pack - 4 (Energy Buffer) and Nominal Remaining -4.

The Nominal Full Pack value is a bit of a mystery. I have seen mine vary from 64.3 to 64.5 (though this is an 85kWh pack).
I know people say our 85kWh packs were "really 81kWh".
Is that 85kWh minus the 4kWh Energy Buffer thus 81kWh USABLE?
Or, were they 81kWh packs with 77kWh USABLE?

Based on my current data from the car I have now 64.3kWh nominal battery (60.3 usable).
On May 13 with my 100% range of 247 I have a USABLE Battery of 68.2kWh (at 276Wh/mi)
So, the updates 2019.16.11 and 2019.16.2 REDUCED my Nominal Full Pack from 72.2 to 64.3 - a loss of ~8kWh.

Sometime the Rated Range multiplier has been changed (I have no idea when).
Initially the S 85 was rated for 265 miles (85kwh/265mi = 320Wh/mi)
NOW the multiplier on MY car is 276Wh/mi.
My average ACTUAL usage for the last 6 months is 316Wh/mi (7,793.7kWh / 24654.0 miles since Jan1, 2019)

TMSpy displays SOC based on Nominal Remaining divided by Nominal Full Pack (leaving our the 4kWh Energy buffer).

Comments welcome!

Great info.
This is what I had for my model:
Rated Range multiplier = 295
265 rated miles * 295 Wh/mi = ~78.175 kWh usable (when new)

Rated Range multiplier varies by model and for the sake of calculation should be a fixed value (per model of course). Is that your understanding as well?

 

[Brass Guy]

Or, were they 81kWh packs with 77kWh USABLE?

This is the closest to actual from what I've read here on TMC.