" words have meaning" yes "authority" = someone who is an expert on a particular subject, in this case lithium ion batteries.
So where is the authority that agrees with your definition of degradation.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software
- Thread starter Dutchmeeuw
- Start date
" words have meaning" yes "authority" = someone who is an expert on a particular subject, in this case lithium ion batteries.
So where is the authority that agrees with your definition of degradation.
Then why did you try to make a trivial semantic argument calling any change in the battery "degradation?" It's weak to try to sound like you're remaining somewhat neutral. If you're going to defend Tesla's practices, then do it. If you're going to criticize Tesla, then do it. But don't talk out of both sides of your mouth.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If that's what you think trying to get to the truth by looking objectively at both sides of the issue then so be it. I'll continue as I have been.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
One need not be an expert in anything to understand that an undesirable change in something is degradation. However I have been studying EV's and batteries for the last 15 years or so. I don't pretend to know everything, but neither would an honest "expert".
Because Tesla said so. Quote from a correspondence with Tesla Service:
"In some cases, the FW may artificially limit the max charge level of cells with enough wear to prevent sudden and significant loss of range."
That sounds exactly like they say they are responding to degradation. Cells that have degraded, "cells with enough wear", are at risk of even more significant and rapid degradation if they don't limit the charge level. But the capping is another, different, form of degradation.
Reading an online forum for a number of years gives an illusion of knowledge. Try owning a Tesla for a decade or more, and you will no longer have that rosy outlook.
How is a bad module in a pack degradation?
Started getting a new software update nag dialog I've never seen. In addition to the one I get getting in or out of my S, I'm not seeing this one pop up several times a day while driving:
No, that voltage delta of 20mv only translates to about 1 kWh - 1.5 kWh difference. Your battery had other problems/failures, aside from any capacity losses due to voltage capping.
Did they say specifically what was wrong with your old battery?
Ferrycraigs
Member
My department used to have a small team of lawyers working for me. That is the sort of debate they used to give me. ie the capping was as a RESULT of degradation, and not degradation of itself. But if we use that statement as the basis, then the magnifying glass needs to be refocussed on what caused the degradation that resulted in the need for Volt capping. (I do not subscribe to the view that Volt capping is degradation, it is an artificial limiting of the usable capacity. I could subscribe to Volt capping being necessary to address something that caused degradation).
In EVERY scenario, because the effect is not seen in every battery, only some, then the issue can ONLY be because of something in the car, not the design of the equipment or software. It appears it may be as a direct result of high powered Supercharging. If so, then it doesn't really matter if that was instant or gradual, it should not have happened. Either the BMS was not doing its job, unlikely as other batteries managed perfectly well, or else the specific battery was not able to withstand that level of charging. As the effect has not happened across the fleet, the only logical conclusion is that the batteries that have been affected are of poorer, or at least different, quality than all the other batteries that have not been affected.
Additionally, as has been pointed out, supercharging, and the power used, is entirely in the control of Tesla, not the owner. It is not possible to reduce the power going in, as it is with AC charging.
So whilst the premise that any degradation happened before Volt capping was deemed necessary is plausible, I would be interested to hear an interpretation that lays the culpability for that 'previous degradation' resting with the owner rather than the manufacturer.
Last edited:
They capped the batteries to mitigate degradation. There is a possible cure for some reversible lithium plating which is discussed in the literature. But not all lithium plating is reversible. The cure would involve more than avoiding highest voltages although that is part of it.
I agree. It is worth distinguishing "unwarrantable degradation" from "warrantable manufacturing defect." That is the key issue.
My hypothesis is that Condition Z is lithium plating which is a type of normal expected degradation, which however does not happen to all batteries in the same way, or to the same degree and is likely exacerbated by something in the usage history of the battery. The volt capping is to mitigate that expected (whether due to past use or bad luck) wear that happens to lithium batteries.
Interesting still no answer to my question
If not lithium plating what do you think condition Z is?
Why so afraid to discuss Condition Z which is the root of all suffering for those with affected batteries?
Last edited:
It does not matter if it is lithium plating or something else, that is pointless speculation.
The capping is still done to cover a design or manufacturing defect. If Tesla programmed in too high charge rates with a cold battery or allowed the battery to be charged to a damaging voltage level then it is a design defect in BMS software.
The capping is still done to cover a design or manufacturing defect. If Tesla programmed in too high charge rates with a cold battery or allowed the battery to be charged to a damaging voltage level then it is a design defect in BMS software.
It matters because degradation is viewed as a get out if jail free word that can be used for anything, with no scientific meaning whatsoever. Tire loses air? Degradation. Thirsty? You need a glass of degradation. December 7 1941? A degradation that will live in infamy. Meanwhile, our batteries are suffering from aloha caused by aloha modifying the aloha to cause aloha in order to avoid more alohas, supposed to be a result of Aloha A.
It doesn't really matter what/who caused the 'previous degradation' because the warranty specifically excludes degradation from coverage.
@bhz the answer to all of your questions regarding Condition Z is still " terrible or absentee parents" or any other gossipy excuse you like.
The thief probably has an excuse. Some people like yourself have decided to call the excuse "condition Z" but that's allot is, an excuse. You wouldn't have to ask if they weren't a thief raised by parents to be immoral motivations. You feel like you need to ask because you want there to be an excuse. There isn't one. There is no Condition Z. If there was, it wouldn't be co cracked from you and you wouldn't be need to manufacture or excusesbeg for labels to excuse Teslas lack of morality and poor upbringing.
You will probably learn your excuses at sentencing, thieves do occasionally offer excuses at trial and Tesla is under federal investigation over their admissions already. I don't think it will give you the closure you want, and deceivers can't be trusted to give you an honest answer. That's why you'll probably be begging for answers Tesla will never give you, even after they have been forced to recall your battery.
You're gossiping about WHY the criminals harmed you, but that gossip will never matter. Accept that the best answer you will ever get is at best an excuse offered by a criminal you've already accepted as an untrustworthy deceiver just by asking the question. You would have been given your answers without ever becoming a victim if there was any trust from Tesla. Gossiping about why you think Condition Z might excuses the thief's lack of a moral upbringing will never bring you the closure you seek. Look to be made whole, that is a concrete expectation you can know you will get.
The thief probably has an excuse. Some people like yourself have decided to call the excuse "condition Z" but that's allot is, an excuse. You wouldn't have to ask if they weren't a thief raised by parents to be immoral motivations. You feel like you need to ask because you want there to be an excuse. There isn't one. There is no Condition Z. If there was, it wouldn't be co cracked from you and you wouldn't be need to manufacture or excusesbeg for labels to excuse Teslas lack of morality and poor upbringing.
You will probably learn your excuses at sentencing, thieves do occasionally offer excuses at trial and Tesla is under federal investigation over their admissions already. I don't think it will give you the closure you want, and deceivers can't be trusted to give you an honest answer. That's why you'll probably be begging for answers Tesla will never give you, even after they have been forced to recall your battery.
You're gossiping about WHY the criminals harmed you, but that gossip will never matter. Accept that the best answer you will ever get is at best an excuse offered by a criminal you've already accepted as an untrustworthy deceiver just by asking the question. You would have been given your answers without ever becoming a victim if there was any trust from Tesla. Gossiping about why you think Condition Z might excuses the thief's lack of a moral upbringing will never bring you the closure you seek. Look to be made whole, that is a concrete expectation you can know you will get.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
What rosy outlook do you think I've expressed? Owning a vehicle does not necessarily provide any insight into the internal technology. Think about how many ICE owners know almost nothing about how their car works. I've spent a lot of time researching the workings of lithium ion batteries, including digging through research papers. I've also built my own battery packs and EV conversions. I've never tried to tell anyone how the Tesla App works or how to set driver profiles or anything similar because I have no knowledge of that. I do have some knowledge about lithium batteries.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
You've decided that degradation can only mean capacity loss. Just because that's your narrow interpretation does not mean it's correct. Question, if your pack had full capacity but could only provide enough power to move the vehicle at 30 mph would you not think the pack had degraded?
On the contrary, we don't get to decide what degradation means it's scientifically defined. You might feel that you can redefine science, and good for you for believing in yourself, but this is a scientific term you're misusing not a random replacement word for whatever you want it to mean, but that doesn't make Aloha an acceptable reason to avoid aloha for aloha. Aloha when aloha aloha aloha aloha, aloha!
Great question. No, battery degradation does not impact kW power output. Volt capping does, so if your battery has failed so much it is limited to single digit horsepower check your volt readings if you suspect batterygate but if you still have full capacity we know you aren't capped under 4.2v since full capacity is impossible on a software capped battery. The latest updates are capping batterygate victims like that (power and capacity, you can't cap only one) - capping is much more invasive, power and range are substantially reduced, and a message telling you to schedule a pack replacement pops up on the IC.
Since you have full capacity, you know you have 0% degradation. Degradation is defined as capacity loss at teh same charge voltage, so no capacity loss is no degradation.
You probably have a contactor issue or isolation fault though. Isolation faults can happen inside the pack itself, but aren't usually a cell failure and are never caused by degradation. Contactors are a common failure everybody will probably run into eventually, and the classic presentation is the power limiting you're experiencing. Don't worry though, unlike degradation it's easily fixed and won't require a total pack replacement.
Your snarky continued incomprehension of the word "degradation" might be helped by reading some resources that will help you:
Here is a US government agency explaining it to you: Battery Lifespan | Transportation Research | NREL in what looks like simple and easy to absorb language while still introducing you to the science.
Aloha!
Great question. No, battery degradation does not impact kW power output. Volt capping does, so if your battery has failed so much it is limited to single digit horsepower check your volt readings if you suspect batterygate but if you still have full capacity we know you aren't capped under 4.2v since full capacity is impossible on a software capped battery. The latest updates are capping batterygate victims like that (power and capacity, you can't cap only one) - capping is much more invasive, power and range are substantially reduced, and a message telling you to schedule a pack replacement pops up on the IC.
Since you have full capacity, you know you have 0% degradation. Degradation is defined as capacity loss at teh same charge voltage, so no capacity loss is no degradation.
You probably have a contactor issue or isolation fault though. Isolation faults can happen inside the pack itself, but aren't usually a cell failure and are never caused by degradation. Contactors are a common failure everybody will probably run into eventually, and the classic presentation is the power limiting you're experiencing. Don't worry though, unlike degradation it's easily fixed and won't require a total pack replacement.
Your snarky continued incomprehension of the word "degradation" might be helped by reading some resources that will help you:
Here is a US government agency explaining it to you: Battery Lifespan | Transportation Research | NREL in what looks like simple and easy to absorb language while still introducing you to the science.
Aloha!
Last edited:
Similar threads
