Dooglas
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 10:08 pm
Delivery Date: 04 Jan 2017
Leaf Number: 314779
Location: Oregon City, OR

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Sun Oct 22, 2017 11:09 pm

johnlocke wrote:If the manufacturer warrants the drivetrain and battery for 100,000 miles why shouldn't I believe them?

Why shouldn't you believe the manufacturers warranty? Well, I'd say you should as it is a legally binding commitment.
2013 Leaf SV - lease ended, 2016 Leaf S30

powersurge
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 10:24 am
Delivery Date: 06 Dec 2014
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 2:34 am

Dooglas wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:Why do those who have such serious anxiety regarding battery temperatures in passively manged packs keep buying LEAFs, and continue sharing their insecurities on this forum?

Not insecurities, disappointment with how fast the battery is aging.
Should they have known how crappy the battery is before purchase ?
Perhaps, but now they are doing their part to save others from the same fate. You know, to reduce your annoyance.

Actually, edatoakrun is asking a fairly good question. Yes, a substantial case can be made for rapid battery degradation in pre 4/13 (primarily '11 and '12) LEAFs in places like Southern Arizona. And providing information to potential buyers on the actual performance of new battery pack formulations is certainly a useful thing to do. But dedicating an entire website to endless tirades about worst case degradation of the '11/'12 battery packs is getting a bit tedious. For those who don't want a passively cooled EV - don't buy one. And for those who don't like the way Nissan dealt with the situation - scratch them off your list. Going to have to move on sooner or later.


My previous post was not accepted by a few. Well, I agree with these posters. Nissans will never publicly say this, but it is true.... PEOPLE IN HOT CLIMATES...... DO NOT BUY A LEAF.. That is all that needs to be said, an I am sure that half of the degradation complaints ill disappear...

cwerdna
Gold Member
Posts: 7193
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 3:07 am

powersurge wrote:My previous post was not accepted by a few. Well, I agree with these posters. Nissans will never publicly say this, but it is true.... PEOPLE IN HOT CLIMATES...... DO NOT BUY A LEAF.. That is all that needs to be said, an I am sure that half of the degradation complaints ill disappear...

Your post at viewtopic.php?p=508929#p508929 was full of ridiculous assertions and hypotheses not based upon known data and science regarding lithium ion-batteries nor observations we've seen here on MNL since the car's been available.

Where is the line drawn about a "hot climate"? Phoenix and Vegas get blazing hot, yes. At what point is "not hot" where people should/are ok to buy a Leaf? These people lost 1+ capacity bars on the disappointing 30 kWh battery Leafs, as examples:
East Bay in CA: viewtopic.php?p=507326#p507326 (arguably one of his areas is hot while the other isn't that hot: viewtopic.php?p=507368#p507368)
Minnesota: viewtopic.php?p=505408#p505408
Minnesota #2: viewtopic.php?p=507624#p507624
Hawaii: viewtopic.php?p=507704#p507704 - down 3 bars. I've only been there twice and in the time I was there, it wasn't hot at all compared to where I live in CA. Perhaps it just doesn't cool down enough at night or in winter?
Layton, UT: viewtopic.php?p=508839#p508839

'13 blue Leaf SV w/premium package (owned)
'13 blue Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium packages (lease over, car returned)
'06 Prius

DaveinOlyWA
Gold Member
Posts: 12235
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:17 am

cwerdna wrote:
powersurge wrote:My previous post was not accepted by a few. Well, I agree with these posters. Nissans will never publicly say this, but it is true.... PEOPLE IN HOT CLIMATES...... DO NOT BUY A LEAF.. That is all that needs to be said, an I am sure that half of the degradation complaints ill disappear...

Your post at viewtopic.php?p=508929#p508929 was full of ridiculous assertions and hypotheses not based upon known data and science regarding lithium ion-batteries nor observations we've seen here on MNL since the car's been available.

Where is the line drawn about a "hot climate"? Phoenix and Vegas get blazing hot, yes. At what point is "not hot" where people should/are ok to buy a Leaf? These people lost 1+ capacity bars on the disappointing 30 kWh battery Leafs, as examples:
East Bay in CA: viewtopic.php?p=507326#p507326 (arguably one of his areas is hot while the other isn't that hot: viewtopic.php?p=507368#p507368)
Minnesota: viewtopic.php?p=505408#p505408
Minnesota #2: viewtopic.php?p=507624#p507624
Hawaii: viewtopic.php?p=507704#p507704 - down 3 bars. I've only been there twice and in the time I was there, it wasn't hot at all compared to where I live in CA. Perhaps it just doesn't cool down enough at night or in winter?
Layton, UT: viewtopic.php?p=508839#p508839


those people are not suffering degradation due to heat, its simply a defective battery batch. You are missing one btw. He lives in the ultra hot region of Northwest Oregon.
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 (build 10/2016)"low water marks" 26,100.2 miles.363GID Ahr 79.55Hx95.35%kwh28.1QCs227,L2's 237
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

LeftieBiker
Posts: 7181
Joined: Wed May 22, 2013 3:17 am
Delivery Date: 31 May 2013
Location: Upstate New York, US

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 11:43 am

those people are not suffering degradation due to heat, its simply a defective battery batch.


That's one possible explanation, but you don't have enough data to be sure about it. "Defective" implies that Nissan designed the battery correctly but made mistakes in the manufacturing process. If the electrolyte/electrode formula was no good in the first place, then that's a bad design that may have been corrected later on.
2013 "Brilliant Silver" SV with Premium Package and no QC, and 2009 Vectrix VX-1 with 18 Leaf cells.

The most offensive, tasteless phrase in use here is "Pulled the trigger." I no longer respond to posts that use it.

DaveinOlyWA
Gold Member
Posts: 12235
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:05 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:
those people are not suffering degradation due to heat, its simply a defective battery batch.


That's one possible explanation, but you don't have enough data to be sure about it. "Defective" implies that Nissan designed the battery correctly but made mistakes in the manufacturing process. If the electrolyte/electrode formula was no good in the first place, then that's a bad design that may have been corrected later on.


Well we can think they changed directions from a course that appeared to be working to try something completely different along with the decision to not test that new course and it backfired on them... or not.

Now, these cells have to be cured and that takes time which means a "hurried toss out the bad and make a new batch before morning" option is not possible. So its either put out what you got or stop the assembly line for several weeks. This makes the decision maybe not the best but definitely quite understandable not to mention the degradation warranty covering 100,000 miles means they have a safety net in place.

Now, is the issue fixed? Probably. After all, it was not a formulation issue its simply a processing error. (my opinion only... at least until enough evidence comes in that will prove me right)

But lets go back to the heat thing. So how did people in very not hot places get 2 years worth of degradation in a few months? We have people in the North that have seen faster degradation in shorter time period than 2011 LEAFers saw in Phoenix.

Provide a statement addressing that
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 (build 10/2016)"low water marks" 26,100.2 miles.363GID Ahr 79.55Hx95.35%kwh28.1QCs227,L2's 237
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SageBrush
Posts: 1425
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 1:02 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:Provide a statement addressing that

Until proven wrong, I'm going with this:
the FSM is pissed at Nissan
2013 Model 'S' with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California with 63.9 Ahr after 22k miles
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado

edatoakrun
Posts: 4716
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:52 pm

johnlocke wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:...Why do those who have such serious anxiety regarding battery temperatures in passively manged packs keep buying LEAFs, and continue sharing their insecurities on this forum?

...I have a 22 mo. old car with 35,000 mi on it and only 73% of its original capacity!..

That is, IMO, extremely unlikely.

How did you determine the original and present capacity?

Owners of "24 kWh" pack LEAFs are fortunate to have the one BEV for which multiple studies on battery capacity loss have been conducted.

You are claiming that your pack has lost a higher percentage of initial capacity in 35,000 miles, than did the four 2012 LEAFs tested over 50,000 miles, subject to brutally high temperatures (all packs averaging over 100F for many months at a time) and the most punishing charge/discharge cycles.

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

Full report here:

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

It would have required a monumental effort on your part to reproduce those extreme conditions in your relatively moderate climate.

When you state:

johnlocke wrote:...I have a 22 mo. old car with 35,000 mi on it and only 73% of its original capacity!..

Do you really mean that is what your LBC says your capacity loss is?

And why do you want to believe that Nissan builds a pack with that poor durability, but also that the LBC report is infallible?

My LEAF has a march 2011 build date, over 56,000 miles in a climate only slightly less warm than yours in Summer, and all indications from recharge capacity and range tests are that my pack has now lost close to 20% of its initial capacity (see my six-year-report quoted below) while my LBC now reports over 33.5% capacity loss (44.03 AHr and 66.46%).

...After more than six years, I've never run out of Wh, and never really suffered from "range anxiety" (charge-site anxiety yes, frequently) and largely credit my never relying on my LBC for its estimates of remaining energy capacity or battery capacity loss, for this experience.

Instead of relying on the LBC, I prefer to use only high-integrity data sources, primarily AVTA test results:

https://avt.inl.gov/vehicle-button/2012-nissan-leaf

And parameters that can be measured accurately, kWh received from the grid, miles driven, and time.

Knowing the approximate nominal kWh available to LBW and VLB from my initial charge of "80%" or "100%", and watching the Nav screen m/kWh while I drive, I know both my nominal kWh used, and what are the approximate N kWh remaining wherever I drive, and can avoid all anxiety caused by the often "pessimistic" estimates from the LBC, of kWh remaining.

I also have a pretty good idea of what my LEAF's total and available battery capacity loss over time has been.

At six years and 52 k miles, my best estimates are:

My LEAF's pack had slightly under 19 kWh total capacity (as per AVTA test standards) and about 17 kWh available, when warm, at ~80 F.

That's about a 21% reduction from the 24 kWh Nissan specified, and ~18.5% lower than the average capacity Nissan actually delivered in 2012, according to AVTA testing of multiple LEAF packs...

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=23733&start=40

Back on-topic.

If any of you are really anxious (or even only concerned) about the "40 kWh" 2018 LEAF's "40 kWh" pack's passive thermal management, just don't buy one.

Unlike seven years ago when the LEAF was the only real option, there are now several decent BEVs out there with complex thermal management systems.

But I doubt that will still be the case in a few more years, as the path to obsolescence for ATM is already fairly clear, IMO.
no condition is permanent

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Gold Member
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:39 pm

edatoakrun wrote:You are claiming that your pack has lost a higher percentage of initial capacity in 35,000 miles, than did the four 2012 LEAFs tested over 50,000 miles, subject to brutally high temperatures (all packs averaging over 100F for many months at a time) and the most punishing charge/discharge cycles.


If any of you are really anxious (or even only concerned) about the "40 kWh" 2018 LEAF's "40 kWh" pack's passive thermal management, just don't buy one.

Unlike seven years ago when the LEAF was the only real option, there are now several decent BEVs out there with complex thermal management systems.

But I doubt that will still be the case in a few more years, as the path to obsolescence for ATM is already fairly clear, IMO.


Johnlocke has a 30kwh pack, and is amongst a group of owners who are experiencing excessively rapid degradation, AND a modification of percentage-capacity-to-bar relationship. You should see his posting history before jumping to conclusions about what he has.

It's the results of his and other early 30kwh leaf owners that's calling into question the reliability of Nissan's new 40kwh battery packs.
[2013 leaf traded for 2016 leaf S30:
build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
1 May 2017 - 7300 miles & 363 GIDs
6 Sep 2017 - 13k miles & 359 GIDs
26 Oct 2017 - 15.5k miles & 344 GIDs]

edatoakrun
Posts: 4716
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Battery temp management for new leaf

Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:59 pm

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
...Johnlocke has a 30kwh pack, and is amongst a group of owners who are experiencing excessively rapid degradation...

AFAIK, only rapid gid loss has been reported, and on only some of the packs.

Anyone reported actual recharge capacity test results for their "30 kWh" packs?

As I posted a month ago on the 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses thread:

viewtopic.php?f=30&p=506232

edatoakrun wrote:If you want to find actual capacity loss on a "30 kWh" LEAF, I'd suggest you test your pack the same way you would for a "24 kWh" pack, albeit with far fewer of the test parameters and variables known, and with only a single (?) "30 kWh" pack having been tested by a high-integrity source.

The EPA test of a 2016 "30 kWh" LEAF (strangely...) shows the same 31.7807 kWh from a 240 volt EVSE required to recharge after both the city (UDDS) and highway cycle tests.

This could correspond to a ~30 kWh (total) pack, that is ~90% accessible, and recharges at ~85% average efficiency over the entire accessible capacity.

Monitor the kWh your pack accepts (and/or the charge time, and voltage) after similar depletion from fully-charged (240 V) pack, after a similar single-event full (to stop) discharge.

Results should be expected to vary a great deal with pack and ambient temperatures, which I don't know for the EPA tests (?)

I'd guess the EPA might test near the 70F to 80F range?

Anyone know?

In "24 kWh" LEAF pack tests, there is significant variation in charge accepted even for the same pack, in identical tests.

This is evidently due to the LBCs inaccuracy in determining the upper and lower charge limits.

You should expect the same in the larger packs, so do not expect a single test to be determinative.

Remember, you are not able to test total pack capacity, only the capacity your LEAF's LBC allowed you to access during the given charge/discharge cycle.

Repeat, to get a larger sample, and also to determine the accuracy or (inaccuracy) of your LBC in determining its upper and lower pack limits.



Certification Summary Information Report

Model Year 2016...

Test Date 03/11/2015

Test Procedure 81 - Charge Depleting UDDS

Recharge Event Voltage 240...

Recharge Event Energy (kiloWatt-hours) 31.7807...

Total distance (mile):166.410...

Test Procedure 84 - Charge Depleting Highway...

Recharge Event Voltage 240...

Recharge Event Energy (kiloWatt-hours) 31.7807...

Charge Depleting Range (Actual miles) 136.408...

Charge Time[sec]:20733...


https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_ ... 671&flag=1

2017 MY certification appears to use the same test results:

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_ ... 806&flag=1
Last edited by edatoakrun on Mon Oct 23, 2017 8:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
no condition is permanent

Return to “New Members & Newbie Questions”