Is the CCS to CHADEMO adapter legitimate?

[cornbinder89]

A lot will depend on how much you FC or would if you could. Another way to look at it, it costs 1/14 the amount of a brand new 40Kwh battery! Is that the best place to put your money? If cost come down and there are no problems reported, than I think it will become widespread.
For me, in my situation, I would likely be better served with a reliable 130-150 mile range and Level 2 charging, than fast charging a 8 year old 24 Kwh battery. True it would be handy the few times I might want to fast charge, but so far I have not done that even once.

 

[Jerther]

I almost bought one until I saw there was a minimum order of 2. Bummer. But that's fine that's fine, at least my mortgage is not compromised.

Yet.

I hope the minimum order and the price drop at the same time...

 

[EVPowers]

Im in Wisconsin, USA.
I would buy the CCS2 version if I knew the CCS2 to CCS1 adapter worked with it.

I can't get a good feel for timeframe for CCS1 version. If it were relatively soon, I'd wait.

 

[evniculus]

To all the people who want to purchase only 1 piece. CCS2 is also available: Adapter CCS1 to CHAdeMO for Nissan Leaf (Pre-Order)

 

[mux]

any technical detail about this CCS port in your leaf?

It was put in be me (muxsan) in the Netherlands. Because it's built into the car, it doesn't have any chademo limitations, like the max 110A charge current limit, so if your battery is large enough and can handle it, you can increase charging speeds.

Downside is that at the moment, this is only available in the Netherlands and quite a bit more expensive.

------

On the legitness of the adapter: It's almost certainly not going to pass muster in Europe. It's missing a bunch of parts that are necessary to ensure safety. To be clear, I've only watched Dala's video, I don't have one at hand to check. But:

1. It only has a positive side contactor. That's an immediate fail, also for reason two:
2. It doesn't have a port lock on the CCS side. This means you can expose high voltage when unplugging the CCS port during operation, which can then draw an arc and cause a fire or personal injury. Massive safety issue
3. It is unclear if there is a HV bus and port sensor, but considering there are no auxiliary contacts on the contactor, I don't think the adapter is capable of measuring voltage on both sides of the contactor. This means it is incapable of testing for contactor welding, also an important safety issue
4. The battery is really tiny, especially if it's to power that contactor for an hour+. That makes me think that contactor might be the wrong type. High current interrupt-capable contactors have strong return springs that actuate a little arc extinguishing feature, and thus need a strong electromagnet (and a lot of power) to keep them closed. An EVC 135 for instance uses about 4W *with* economizer, per contactor. Just keeping the contactors on requires at least 8W continuous. Our CCS controller also uses about 3.6W continuous. Accounting for degradation of the operating battery and at least a 2-hour life (which is probably the minimum convenient lifespan that doesnt require you to recharge the adapter after every use), you'd need 30-40Wh in there.

Much less importantly for safety or functionality, but very important for acceptance:

1. It doesn't look like they're using a certified CHAdeMO side plug positive, or paying CHAdeMO royalties. Most likely, this is an unauthorized CHAdeMO product
2. They're definitely not using a standards-compliant CCS controller (e.g. Vector/Sensata VC-VCCU)

All of this happened before. Back in the '00s and early '10s, people made adaptors to charge their DIY and small series EVs on all those newfangled fast chargers that were popping up, and the poor quality of those adapters often caused issues for the charging provider. Broken and molten connectors, charging fires, anything you can think of, it happened. They ended up flat-out banning all adapters at Fastned, only allowing for that one certified CHAdeMO to Tesla adapter to allow Model Ses to charge.

This adapter is heading the same way if they don't address the main safety issues. I'm not super stressed about the adapter becoming banned, especially because... who's going to enforce that? There are no humans there to check on you.

To make this into a certified adapter, the costs are quite high. They'd need to:
- become a member of the SAE as well as the CHAdeMO organization (not that expensive)
- pay royalties per plug (~500 euros).
- They will at least need to do certification testing at CHAdeMO, which runs between €20k-40k. I don't think you need to do certification with SAE unless you want to implement PnC and internet-connected features.
- Do field testing with cars (we've had customers do that alongside myself for our CCS upgrade, but if you'd need to hire somebody for this, that would be about the salary of a field application engineer for a year).
- Add the right kind of high interrupt capable contactors to the body (e.g. TE EVC 135, about €100 for two in medium quantities)
- Add dual HV sensing circuits (e.g. Isabellenhütte IVT-3, ~€175 in medium quantities)
- Add a port lock and actuator circuit (e.g. Duosida DSIEC, about 15 euros)

Altogether, it's easily €100k in testing/validation plus about €800 per plug in costs, so when adding typical Chinese margins (~7%) and VAT (~20%) that would mean a price increase of about €1100 per plug just for materials. Then also, you need to amortize €150k in fixed costs over the production volume. Say they can sell 1000 units, that's about 200 euros on top.

So I don't see a possibility to sell this for less than, roughly, €2200. And this is in line with what we figured out long ago when we were about to start development on CCS products.

 

[philphluter]

It was put in be me (muxsan) in the Netherlands. Because it's built into the car, it doesn't have any chademo limitations, like the max 110A charge current limit, so if your battery is large enough and can handle it, you can increase charging speeds.

Downside is that at the moment, this is only available in the Netherlands and quite a bit more expensive.

------

On the legitness of the adapter: It's almost certainly not going to pass muster in Europe. It's missing a bunch of parts that are necessary to ensure safety. To be clear, I've only watched Dala's video, I don't have one at hand to check. But:

1. It only has a positive side contactor. That's an immediate fail, also for reason two:
2. It doesn't have a port lock on the CCS side. This means you can expose high voltage when unplugging the CCS port during operation, which can then draw an arc and cause a fire or personal injury. Massive safety issue
3. It is unclear if there is a HV bus and port sensor, but considering there are no auxiliary contacts on the contactor, I don't think the adapter is capable of measuring voltage on both sides of the contactor. This means it is incapable of testing for contactor welding, also an important safety issue
4. The battery is really tiny, especially if it's to power that contactor for an hour+. That makes me think that contactor might be the wrong type. High current interrupt-capable contactors have strong return springs that actuate a little arc extinguishing feature, and thus need a strong electromagnet (and a lot of power) to keep them closed. An EVC 135 for instance uses about 4W *with* economizer, per contactor. Just keeping the contactors on requires at least 8W continuous. Our CCS controller also uses about 3.6W continuous. Accounting for degradation of the operating battery and at least a 2-hour life (which is probably the minimum convenient lifespan that doesnt require you to recharge the adapter after every use), you'd need 30-40Wh in there.

Much less importantly for safety or functionality, but very important for acceptance:

1. It doesn't look like they're using a certified CHAdeMO side plug positive, or paying CHAdeMO royalties. Most likely, this is an unauthorized CHAdeMO product
2. They're definitely not using a standards-compliant CCS controller (e.g. Vector/Sensata VC-VCCU)

All of this happened before. Back in the '00s and early '10s, people made adaptors to charge their DIY and small series EVs on all those newfangled fast chargers that were popping up, and the poor quality of those adapters often caused issues for the charging provider. Broken and molten connectors, charging fires, anything you can think of, it happened. They ended up flat-out banning all adapters at Fastned, only allowing for that one certified CHAdeMO to Tesla adapter to allow Model Ses to charge.

This adapter is heading the same way if they don't address the main safety issues. I'm not super stressed about the adapter becoming banned, especially because... who's going to enforce that? There are no humans there to check on you.

To make this into a certified adapter, the costs are quite high. They'd need to:
- become a member of the SAE as well as the CHAdeMO organization (not that expensive)
- pay royalties per plug (~500 euros).
- They will at least need to do certification testing at CHAdeMO, which runs between €20k-40k. I don't think you need to do certification with SAE unless you want to implement PnC and internet-connected features.
- Do field testing with cars (we've had customers do that alongside myself for our CCS upgrade, but if you'd need to hire somebody for this, that would be about the salary of a field application engineer for a year).
- Add the right kind of high interrupt capable contactors to the body (e.g. TE EVC 135, about €100 for two in medium quantities)
- Add dual HV sensing circuits (e.g. Isabellenhütte IVT-3, ~€175 in medium quantities)
- Add a port lock and actuator circuit (e.g. Duosida DSIEC, about 15 euros)

Altogether, it's easily €100k in testing/validation plus about €800 per plug in costs, so when adding typical Chinese margins (~7%) and VAT (~20%) that would mean a price increase of about €1100 per plug just for materials. Then also, you need to amortize €150k in fixed costs over the production volume. Say they can sell 1000 units, that's about 200 euros on top.

So I don't see a possibility to sell this for less than, roughly, €2200. And this is in line with what we figured out long ago when we were about to start development on CCS products.

The adaptor appears to have obtained the “CE” certification.
Dalia has addressed the attempted withdrawal under load. A rapid disconnect feature also a button on the adaptor to quick stop charging.

 

[philphluter]

The adaptor appears to have obtained the “CE” certification.
Dalia has addressed the attempted withdrawal under load. A rapid disconnect feature also a button on the adaptor to quick stop charging.

Dala!

 

[Oostenrijker]

I think I will skip the adapter: what I really would want, is a affordable way to do three phase charging. Fast charging is expensive...

But in the Netherlands, we have a lot of 11kW public AC chargers: where the Leaf only charges with 3kW. It could be way quicker, but neither I'm willing to do an upgrade. I'm to concerned about battery warranty, as I already had bad experiences with Nissan ( dealership).

My main concern with the adapter would be, that there isn't a guarantee it's going work at every CCS charger. And once I trade the Leaf in, than that money spend on a adapter. Or even an modification done by @mux will evaporate in the thin air, because EV's hold very low resell value on the moment.

I can't imagine many people would want to pay more for your Leaf, just because you made it able to do three phase charging. So I actually would spent as less as possible on the Leaf, because the depreciation is crazy.

 

[cornbinder89]

Oostenrijker,
Does your car only have the 3.3kw? charger, most here since the mid decade had the bigger 6 kw charger. I could see if your home wiring is limited, but should be able to charge at the faster rate from the public chargers.

 

[Oostenrijker]

Oostenrijker,
Does your car only have the 3.3kw? charger, most here since the mid decade had the bigger 6 kw charger. I could see if your home wiring is limited, but should be able to charge at the faster rate from the public chargers.

No, but in order to make use of the 6.6kW charging you need a 3 phase 22kW public charger. Which is common in Germany, but not in the Netherlands. Here almost all 3 phase chargers are 11kW.

And the Leaf can only do 1 phase charging, so you get about 3kW max from a 11kW 3 phase public charger.

 

[cornbinder89]

Ah, ok I see. here is all single phase on the Leaf, and we can use the full 6 kw the onboard charger can provide as long as the circuit can supply the needed 27.5 amps.
Your supply can only provide 1/3 the cap on single phase as it can on three. We, in the US are spoiled, where single phase charging is the norm.

 

[prft]

It was put in be me (muxsan) in the Netherlands. Because it's built into the car, it doesn't have any chademo limitations, like the max 110A charge current limit, so if your battery is large enough and can handle it, you can increase charging speeds.

Downside is that at the moment, this is only available in the Netherlands and quite a bit more expensive.

------

On the legitness of the adapter: It's almost certainly not going to pass muster in Europe. It's missing a bunch of parts that are necessary to ensure safety. To be clear, I've only watched Dala's video, I don't have one at hand to check. But:

1. It only has a positive side contactor. That's an immediate fail, also for reason two:
2. It doesn't have a port lock on the CCS side. This means you can expose high voltage when unplugging the CCS port during operation, which can then draw an arc and cause a fire or personal injury. Massive safety issue
3. It is unclear if there is a HV bus and port sensor, but considering there are no auxiliary contacts on the contactor, I don't think the adapter is capable of measuring voltage on both sides of the contactor. This means it is incapable of testing for contactor welding, also an important safety issue
4. The battery is really tiny, especially if it's to power that contactor for an hour+. That makes me think that contactor might be the wrong type. High current interrupt-capable contactors have strong return springs that actuate a little arc extinguishing feature, and thus need a strong electromagnet (and a lot of power) to keep them closed. An EVC 135 for instance uses about 4W *with* economizer, per contactor. Just keeping the contactors on requires at least 8W continuous. Our CCS controller also uses about 3.6W continuous. Accounting for degradation of the operating battery and at least a 2-hour life (which is probably the minimum convenient lifespan that doesnt require you to recharge the adapter after every use), you'd need 30-40Wh in there.

Much less importantly for safety or functionality, but very important for acceptance:

1. It doesn't look like they're using a certified CHAdeMO side plug positive, or paying CHAdeMO royalties. Most likely, this is an unauthorized CHAdeMO product
2. They're definitely not using a standards-compliant CCS controller (e.g. Vector/Sensata VC-VCCU)

All of this happened before. Back in the '00s and early '10s, people made adaptors to charge their DIY and small series EVs on all those newfangled fast chargers that were popping up, and the poor quality of those adapters often caused issues for the charging provider. Broken and molten connectors, charging fires, anything you can think of, it happened. They ended up flat-out banning all adapters at Fastned, only allowing for that one certified CHAdeMO to Tesla adapter to allow Model Ses to charge.

This adapter is heading the same way if they don't address the main safety issues. I'm not super stressed about the adapter becoming banned, especially because... who's going to enforce that? There are no humans there to check on you.

To make this into a certified adapter, the costs are quite high. They'd need to:
- become a member of the SAE as well as the CHAdeMO organization (not that expensive)
- pay royalties per plug (~500 euros).
- They will at least need to do certification testing at CHAdeMO, which runs between €20k-40k. I don't think you need to do certification with SAE unless you want to implement PnC and internet-connected features.
- Do field testing with cars (we've had customers do that alongside myself for our CCS upgrade, but if you'd need to hire somebody for this, that would be about the salary of a field application engineer for a year).
- Add the right kind of high interrupt capable contactors to the body (e.g. TE EVC 135, about €100 for two in medium quantities)
- Add dual HV sensing circuits (e.g. Isabellenhütte IVT-3, ~€175 in medium quantities)
- Add a port lock and actuator circuit (e.g. Duosida DSIEC, about 15 euros)

Altogether, it's easily €100k in testing/validation plus about €800 per plug in costs, so when adding typical Chinese margins (~7%) and VAT (~20%) that would mean a price increase of about €1100 per plug just for materials. Then also, you need to amortize €150k in fixed costs over the production volume. Say they can sell 1000 units, that's about 200 euros on top.

So I don't see a possibility to sell this for less than, roughly, €2200. And this is in line with what we figured out long ago when we were about to start development on CCS products.

I did a similar back-of-the-envelope calculation a couple years back when I first bought my LEAF and came to a similar conclusion of about $2000 wholesale for a CSS to ChaDeMo adapter. There appear to be two Chinese companies with products coming out at $1100/€1000. I’m guessing that one key difference is they aren’t paying the certification fees. It would be nice for someone knowledgeable to obtain the different versions and check out the build quality and safety.

 

[kaiat]

The adaptor appears to have obtained the “CE” certification.
Dalia has addressed the attempted withdrawal under load. A rapid disconnect feature also a button on the adaptor to quick stop charging.

CE-certification is not a sign of approval or testing from an independent or government agency. It is just a mark the manufacturer put on a product to prove that it is built to meet European standards. Therefor, it is entirely possible that the product doesn't really meet those standards if the manufacturer is kinda "shady".

 

[mux]

The adaptor appears to have obtained the “CE” certification.
Dalia has addressed the attempted withdrawal under load. A rapid disconnect feature also a button on the adaptor to quick stop charging.

I can't find any registration and CE is largely self-certified (also, rarely actually properly done, most CE is the similar but distinct 'china export' which is meaningless). For this particular type of product, you can get some confidence on quality if:

- The manufacturer had the product tested by an independent agency like TÜV, UL, etc.. You're going to expect the label to have the document number printed on it to verify.
- The manufacturer is listed with their name and products on the CHAdeMO organization website

By the way, it's not necessarily immediately 'shady' if a CE marking is present on a clearly noncompliant product. It's basically standard practice for Chinese equipment manufacturers. But it has diluted the meaningfulness of the mark.

On the port lock issue: It's not enough to 'test' rapidly disconnecting the connector by hand. Most of the time, DC power won't draw arcs under load, that'sto be expected. But it is something that will just happen in way too many cases to be safe if you don't have arc extinguishing features present, and neither the CHAdeMO nor the CCS combo connector have this built in. It *has* to be provided by a specific type of contactor.

 

[coulomb]

4. The battery is really tiny, especially if it's to power that contactor for an hour+.

The battery is only needed until the charger and/or car close their contactors, so that a DC-DC can take over and also recharge the battery. It's a nuisance that results from this sort of thing not being envisaged in the DC charging standards. Even so, the first version of the adapter had a battery that was too small, although that might have had something to do with testing conditions versus usual case conditions.

I'm pretty sure that the contactor that looks like a Kilovac / Tyco EV200 is DC rated, though of course one has to wonder about Chinese testing and quality assurance. As someone else said, it would be great to have an expert carefully examine such details. I am no such an expert.

Without thinking it through, I can't see the harm in only having the positive side with a contactor in an adapter. I think it can be presumed that both the vehicle and the charger will break both sides, and the vehicle and charger should both be monitoring for leakage on both sides to chassis and earth respectively. If this was built into a vehicle, then certainly I'd insist on breakers on both sides.

Some of your other points are salient and sobering, however. The CHAdeMO license of €500 per plug seems extortionate. Perhaps it made some sense a decade ago when there were few EVs, at least until the no doubt very substantial cost of designing and documenting such a standard was amortised.

Edit: Please pardon the late reply.

 

[coulomb]

Most of the time, DC power won't draw arcs under load, that's to be expected.

? If you interrupt 400 V+ at 100 A+ (40 kW+) under load, I guarantee you will get a severe arc.

I think what you meant to say is that these high power DC systems are designed to almost never need to interrupt by mechanical contact under load, so that this is rarely an issue. I think that an emergency interrupt button on the side of the adapter is a dubious thing. It will hopefully be used way more by accident than in an actual emergency, and it will be very hard on the components. A typical contactor is rated to interrupt full rated DC current twice in its lifetime. So after one such interruption, it should be replaced. But who will perform such a replacement?

It's possibly there more for marketing / peace of mind than as something you'd ever want to test. I certainly hope that they have taken steps to ensure that it's very hard to accidentally operate. My impression from having seen the video only once, not looking specifically at this issue, is that it they have not taken any such steps.

When you ask "what could possibly go wrong" with something like this, unfortunately, you'd have to say "quite a bit, actually". We want EVs to be easy to use, so the scary details of high power DC have to be safely tucked away and designed with safety as a very high priority. I'm confident that the major vehicle manufacturers have achieved this; if it wasn't the case, then genuine horror stories would be commonplace. While an adapter such as this could be very useful to many if it could be made safe and at a reasonable price, there is a lot to consider.

 

[coulomb]

Dala!

There is an edit button, just to the right of the Report button, that can be used up to 24 hours after a post for non-paying forum users. Paying users get 30 days, from memory.

I'm not trying to call you out here, we're all getting used to the new forum software. I'm guessing that you have some sort of auto-correct turned on.

 

[mux]

The battery is only needed until the charger and/or car close their contactors, so that a DC-DC can take over and also recharge the battery. It's a nuisance that results from this sort of thing not being envisaged in the DC charging standards. Even so, the first version of the adapter had a battery that was too small, although that might have had something to do with testing conditions versus usual case conditions.

Neither CHAdeMO nor CCS have power supply pins built-in, so all of the self-consumption of the adapter has to be provided by the battery. This includes powering the contactors, which are a large drain. This isn't provided by the dc/dc converter, it all still has to come from the battery in the adapter. I agree that for these applications it's pretty annoying to know a perfectly usable 12V supply is just inches away

Without thinking it through, I can't see the harm in only having the positive side with a contactor in an adapter. I think it can be presumed that both the vehicle and the charger will break both sides, and the vehicle and charger should both be monitoring for leakage on both sides to chassis and earth respectively. If this was built into a vehicle, then certainly I'd insist on breakers on both sides.

No, it's just not safe. There are multiple reasons, but I think the most important one is

Some of your other points are salient and sobering, however. The CHAdeMO license of €500 per plug seems extortionate. Perhaps it made some sense a decade ago when there were few EVs, at least until the no doubt very substantial cost of designing and documenting such a standard was amortised.

Edit: Please pardon the late reply.

It's genuinely annoying how the CHAdeMO standard has been put together from a popularization perspective. It's not just the licensing cost, it's also the super-intricate molding of the connector and the weird pin retention (with super tight tolerances) that makes it a needlessly complex connector. It's got a few unique upsides, e.g. shutters on the HV pins, but with dc/dc converters now dropping well below $0.05/W, you can build all the power electronics for a 50kW charger for $3500-4000, so it becomes ludicrous to spend $1500+ on the connector and licensing.

? If you interrupt 400 V+ at 100 A+ (40 kW+) under load, I guarantee you will get a severe arc. I think what you meant to say is that these high power DC systems are designed to almost never need to interrupt by mechanical contact under load, so that this is rarely an issue.

The design of both the chademo and CCS side make it so, if everything is working as intended, the EVSE-side contactors will open and the output energy is quenched before the connector can be pulled out more than a centimeter or two. So yeah, I meant that other safety systems are there to save the ass of this adapter design.

A typical contactor is rated to interrupt full rated DC current twice in its lifetime. So after one such interruption, it should be replaced. But who will perform such a replacement?

I personally would suggest the TE EVC-135 contactor which is specifically designed for this purpose. It's got a 135A continuous rating and 660A interrupt rating. That interrupt rating is high enough to sustain dozens of interrupt events without needing replacement.

It's possibly there more for marketing / peace of mind than as something you'd ever want to test. I certainly hope that they have taken steps to ensure that it's very hard to accidentally operate. My impression from having seen the video only once, not looking specifically at this issue, is that it they have not taken any such steps.

Yep. It's a prototype to show this can be done, not a robust design ready for mass adoption. That's fine, my company operated that way for 2-3 years as well. I don't fault them much for that, but at the same time I think it's important to put the information out there that there is a reason this type of device hasn't existed yet and probably never will - to actually make it safe and compliant is inherently quite expensive. And as you said, goodwill towards EVs and technologies hinges a lot on an implied contract between engineers and users that everybody has done their job properly. If that trust fades, you end up ruining it for everybody.

 

[Oostenrijker]

As someone else said, it would be great to have an expert carefully examine such details. I am no such an expert.

Its been examined by the great Dala, who is like a God. So if he says it works good, then I believe him.

 

[coulomb]

Neither CHAdeMO nor CCS have power supply pins built-in, so all of the self-consumption of the adapter has to be provided by the battery. This includes powering the contactors, which are a large drain. This isn't provided by the dc/dc converter,

Sorry, I wasn't clear. My understanding is that a small isolated DC-DC converter internal to the adapter takes a few tens of watts from the power on the big pins to run the electronics and re-charge the internal battery for next time. This is just a rounding error when tens of kilowatts of power are flowing to the vehicle.

Though as I type this, the error might become significant in very unusual cases, like if someone charges to 100% and/or equalisation, where the power flow into the vehicle might be only 350 W. Perhaps they adjust the requested power to adjust for this difference. Otherwise, one or other side, vehicle or charger, might detect the discrepancy and stop the charge.

but I think the most important one is

Penny for your completed thought?

So yeah, I meant that other safety systems are there to save the ass of this adapter design.

Well, I don't think it's the adapter's job to make up for any deficiencies in the vehicle or charger.

I personally would suggest the TE EVC-135 contactor which is specifically designed for this purpose. It's got a 135A continuous rating and 660A interrupt rating. That interrupt rating is high enough to sustain dozens of interrupt events without needing replacement.

I obviously haven't kept up with developments; that's genuinely impressive.