SageBrush
Posts: 2791
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:56 pm

Yep ... this is just troll food insofar as the "missing kWh" story goes.
My read of the drive was ~ 130 Wh/mile for ~ 600 miles.

So left unanswered is why the Wh/meter is inaccurate for this kind of driving.
Not exactly the most important question in the world ... but interesting to Tesla nerds.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:18 pm

EVDRIVER wrote:Since most Tesla drivers are getting fantastic range and high instrument accuracy they really don't care...

Satisfaction out of ignorance?

What the range attempt showed is that the model 3 instruments are definitely NOT accurate, and under warm conditions, will significantly underestimate energy use,

And according to TSLA, the principle reason is that thermal management (for the pack, and by implication, for the cab as well) is left unaccounted for by the energy use/efficiency displays.

And note these were only warm conditions, with daytime highs of only 93 to 94 F (and of course much lower night and average temperatures) according to the drivers.

Imagine the kW required in really hot temperatures (think Phoenix in August, instead of Denver in May) for pack cooling?

This is surprising because the reporting on TSLA thermal management on the S/X packs I've seen suggested modules were allowed to reach up to ~113 F during DC charges:

https://www.teslarati.com/watch-tesla-b ... rcharging/

And/or with the (lower) coolant temperature up to ~104 F during repeated charge/discharge cycles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=izUl28YtQbE

If model 3 packs were allowed to reach similar temperatures, there should be little to no energy required at all for cooling during such mild weather, and with as low kW demand, as during the 606 mile test.

So, the new cells used in model 3's may require lower temperatures and demand more energy for cooling, so the first thing to look into is probably, just what temperatures the model 3 packs are required to maintain, in high ambient temperatures.

Any easy way to monitor pack temperatures in a model 3?
no condition is permanent

SageBrush
Posts: 2791
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:26 pm

edatoakrun wrote:What the range attempt showed is that the model 3 instruments are definitely NOT accurate, and under warm conditions, will significantly underestimate energy use,

No. The hypermile trip did not use cabin cooling, leading to an atypical use profile

And according to TSLA, the principle reason is that thermal management (for the pack, and by implication, for the cab as well) is left unaccounted for by the energy use/efficiency displays.

Wrong. There is ZERO reason to think that cabin cooling is not correctly measured.

Are you grumpy from a bad stock day ? :lol:
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

User avatar
jlv
Posts: 862
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 6:08 pm
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2014
Leaf Number: 424487
Location: Massachusetts

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 7:54 am

edatoakrun wrote:And note these were only warm conditions, with daytime highs of only 93 to 94 F (and of course much lower night and average temperatures) according to the drivers.

In my locale, 90s is hot conditions.
'13 SL+Prem (mfg 12/13, leased 4/14, bought 5/17) 33K miTesla S 75D (3/17) 27K mi
3 reservation canceled; X on order.

User avatar
lpickup
Posts: 1142
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 2:14 pm
Delivery Date: 09 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 16138
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact: Website

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 11:47 am

edatoakrun wrote:What the range attempt showed is that the model 3 instruments are definitely NOT accurate, and under warm conditions, will significantly underestimate energy use,


You forgot to include "under hypermiling conditions" (or "low Wh/mile conditions:" if you prefer) to the list of caveats above.

If the overhead due to pack cooling (and I am completely making this up, but stick with me) is 1000W, and you are averaging 22 mph while achieving 130Wh/mile consumption for traction at this speed, then in one hour you will have consumed 2860 Wh traction + 1000Wh pack cooling, or 3860 Wh total. From the perspective of the traction consumption, you are using 35% more energy than the instrument (if it doesn't take pack cooling consumption into account).

But now assume you are driving a more typical 70mph and achieving 250Wh/mile at that speed. In an hour you will have consumed 17500Wh for traction and let's even say that the cooling requirements go up to 1500W at that consumption rate, for a total of 19000Wh used. Again, from the perspective of your reference (traction) consumption, you are only using an additional 8.6%.

Much different amount of overhead.

And like we've been saying, you're probably the only one that cares, because the rest of us quickly realize what our own driving styles are actually capable of achieving when it comes to range. And I'm pretty sure most of us aren't doing the math in our heads to calculate our remaining range is from the Wh/mile meter.

Not only that, but if it were a big deal and the meter was not counting pack heating/cooling requirements as part of it's display, that's yet another one of those things that can be fixed OTA.
...Lance

Deep Blue Metallic 2018 Tesla Model 3 (31849) (delivered: 7/13/18)
Coulis Red 2016 SV (312310) (bought: 12/23/16 sold: 7/5/18)
Glacier Pearl 2012 SL (016138) (delivered: 12/9/11; traded in 12/23/16)
NOGA$4ME Blog

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:20 pm

lpickup wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:...What the range attempt showed is that the model 3 instruments are definitely NOT accurate, and under warm conditions, will significantly underestimate energy use...

...If the overhead due to pack cooling (and I am completely making this up, but stick with me) is 1000W...

No need to make anything up, which can only confuse the issue.

Tesla submitted EPA certification showing the LR 3 pack will accept ~89.4 kWh from a full charge:

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_ ... 148&flag=1

The range test results are consistent with only about 66 kWh being available for traction before shutdown, which also happens to be what the 3's BMS reportedly stated.

~66/~89.4= ~74% grid-to-road efficiency, which is quite frankly terrible, and while it's true efficiency would be expected to have been better at higher speeds, it also certainly would have been much worse under hot (or even consistently warm) conditions, if you buy TSLA's explanation of cooling load being primarily responsible for the poor test results.

lpickup wrote:... I'm pretty sure most of us aren't doing the math in our heads to calculate our remaining range is from the Wh/mile meter...

It's actually quite simple, and by doing so while I drive, and after correcting for my LEAF's LBC (BMS) reporting errors for both miles and kWh, I always know my remaining available kWh capacity while I drive, and also know the total actual available capacity remaining in my pack, at "80% and "100%" charge levels.

Resulting in little range anxiety, or degradation anxiety (as compared to those on this forum who rely on the inaccurate LBC reports) as I enter the eighth Hot North Valley/foothill Summer with my OE pack.

Seven year report, 2011 LEAF.

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=25454
no condition is permanent

SageBrush
Posts: 2791
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 2:48 pm

edatoakrun wrote:The range test results are consistent with only about 66 kWh being available for traction before shutdown

BS. You are BOTH an idiot and a troll
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 472
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 4:12 pm

edatoakrun wrote:Tesla submitted EPA certification showing the LR 3 pack will accept ~89.4 kWh from a full charge:

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_ ... 148&flag=1



If you're going to be disingenuous, don't be so obvious about it. Everyone who reads that document knows that's how much electricity was supplied from the wall and thus doesn't include charging losses. Better yet, just cover your short position and save yourself the headache.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
Date - Miles / GIDs:
May '17 - 7300 mi / 363
Feb '18 - 20.5k mi / 333

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:40 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:Tesla submitted EPA certification showing the LR 3 pack will accept ~89.4 kWh from a full charge:

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_ ... 148&flag=1

...Everyone who reads that document knows that's how much electricity was supplied from the wall and thus doesn't include charging losses...

Actually, the energy accepted on recharge comes from the grid, as supplied by the EVSE.

I used the term grid-to-road efficiency rather than Overall Trip Efficiency as I thought it more self-explanatory.

edatoakrun wrote:...The range test results are consistent with only about 66 kWh being available for traction before shutdown, which also happens to be what the 3's BMS reportedly stated.

~66/~89.4= ~74% grid-to-road efficiency, which is quite frankly terrible...

For example, in AVTA testing a 2014 Tesla Model S 85 kWh averaged ~89% efficiency over three test cycles:

2014 Tesla Model S 85 kWh
Advanced Vehicle Testing – Baseline Vehicle Testing Results...

(A+/C) Overall Trip Efficiency 15: 90% 88% 89%...

15. Overall Vehicle Efficiency is calculated by dividing the DC energy out of the battery (A+) by the AC energy from the EVSE (C).

https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files ... models.pdf

BTW, while I don't mind explaining things to you, if you continue be as obnoxious in your replies as in the one above, you will join SageBrush in onanistic conversation...
no condition is permanent

SageBrush
Posts: 2791
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Official Tesla Model 3 thread

Thu Jun 07, 2018 7:24 pm

edatoakrun wrote: if you continue be as obnoxious in your replies as in the one above, you will join SageBrush in onanistic conversation...

Well now, that should be an offer no one other than shorting trolls should pass up.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”