Active EV-CAN sampling: cell voltages, pack temperatures...

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
dm33 said:
TickTock said:
Depends on the app. I integrate V*I*delta_T to compute the kWh during driving for efficiency computations. For remaining energy in the battery, gids remains the best indicator. Multiply by .075 to get kWh.
Thanks. That doesn't seem to be what the Android Leaf app is doing. For my car it shows 260 GIDs and 20.8kwh at a recent 100% charge.
260*.075 = 19.5 kwh.
I had seen a GID described as 80 watt hours. That if I use 0.08 then it does work out,
260*.080 = 20.8 kwh.
Which value is correct?

Both are correct. 300 Gid * 80 = 24kWh

Of that 24kWh capacity, 22.48kWh is pumped into the battery, and about 0.48kWh of the 22.48kWh is held in the battery at the bottom of the SOC, leaving 22kWh pumped in the battery that is "available" to use. Unfortunately, there are losses not accounted for with the 80 kWh calculation when you pull the energy out.

The usable value is closer to 75 per Gid, not 80. Actually, for that brand new battery with 21.3kWh usable at room temperature, it is about 77.45 per Gid.

A fully charged battery at 281 Gid, minus the 6-ish Gid remaining at Turtle leaves 275 Gid used multiplied by 77.45 per Gid = 21.3kWh (actually measured in a government test at room temperature). So, I just want to be clear that there are temperature related adjustments to capacity. We see Nissan's programming for these adjustments in the winter as the Gid count actually goes UP, even though the battery capacity goes down with cold.

LEAF battery capacities

Energy from the wall from dead to 100%: 25.414 kWh
Energy from the onboard charger to battery: 22.031 kWh (86.6% charger efficiency)
Energy from the battery during discharge: 21.381 kWh (our generic "21kWh" useable at 70F)

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2012/veh_sys_sim/vss030_lohsebusch_2012_o.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2012/adv_power_electronics/ape006_burress_2012_p.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



New 70F/20C fully charged battery
12 Fuel bars segments showing

-------------------KWH-------Gid------SOC%
Rated capacity: --24 ------- 300 ---- 100
Max possible. : ---24 ------ 300 ----- 100
Stored energy: --22.5 ----- 281 ----- 95 (4.1v per cell, 393.5 volts)
Usable energy: --21.0 ----- 281 ----- 95 (4.1v per cell, 393.5 volts)
Depleted cutoff: --0.5 ------ 6 -------- 2 (zero fuel bars remaining, 300v)


The battery temperature correction factors that I use are actually used in the LEAF Spy app for the DTE data. The app also uses the 0.48kWh stored at the bottom of the charge for DTE calculations, instead of counting GIDs to zero for range (which it obviously will never reach).

The battery temperature formula is 1% loss per 4F degrees below 70F and gains 1% per 8F above 70F.

Therefore, 281 GIDs at 30F battery temperature will have about 19kWh of usable energy, which is 69 watts per Gid. So, 75 is as good as any singular value, but obviously it needs adjustments for temperature, and the wattHour value per Gid can vary significantly.
 
TonyWilliams said:
dm33 said:
Which value is correct?

Both are correct. 300 Gid * 80 = 24kWh
Whoa. Lots of numbers and values.

To put it a different way.... when the car reports 4.1 mi/kwh, which kWh are we talking about. I assume not from the wall. I would think the value someone wants to know while they're looking at an app in the car is the kWh that related to the car reported efficiency (mi/kwh) so you can estimate range.

Is it 84 mile range at 62mph at 4.1mi/kwh? 20.48 kWh. Figuring 281 Gids, thats 73 watts/Gid.

What would a user want to see for kWh displayed in an app. 80watts/kwh to be consistent w the Android Leaf app? Some other value? Are Gids better for a user to use to guestimate range rather than kWh?

And to make sure I understand.... there is no kWh measurement reported by the Leaf. Only Gids...
 
It's been suggested to Jim to implement a battery efficiency factor and temperature compensation. I'm not sure if he has gotten around to that yet. To be clear, GIDs are 80 kWh stored energy, full point. To account for losses and other factors, the LEAF monitors pack voltage and substracts from the GID count as needed. This can be observed sometimes when you turn the LEAF off and then on only to see a battery SOC bar disappear. That's because the LEAF adjusted the GID count to more adequately reflect currently available energy in the battery. Of course, none of that is taken into account if the battery simply multiplies GIDs by 80 Wh. This has to be properly understood to account for the different numbers and expectations. I wish Jim had listened early on, but then he was willing to compromise a lot, and go down a path others wouldn't. Phil's LeafScan, the gold standard of meters last year, was supposed to work much the same way. I'm hopeful that all this will be addressed more adequately soon.
 
To account for losses and other factors, the LEAF monitors pack voltage
and substracts from the GID count as needed. This can be observed sometimes
when you turn the LEAF off and then on only to see a battery SOC bar disappear.
Minor point of information:

The vanishing battery fullness Bar has little to do with any adjustment of the
GIDs value. With NO change in the GID value, a bar will often "vanish" due to
the hysteresis in managing the Bars in the display.

While driving, a Bar will persist (continue to be displayed) until the Bar is
empty, then it disappears. From 11.0 down to 10.01 the 11th Bar shows
(while displaying a generally declining battery pack "fullness").

However, when starting up the car (like when charging), a bar is displayed
only if it is half full, or more. So, from 10.01 to 10.49 the 11th Bar is NOT
displayed.

Thus, driving along with 8 Bars showing, and the "fullness" is 7.3 (anywhere
between 7.01 and 7.49). Stop, turn the car Off and back On, and...
PRESTO, the 8th bar is gone!

Nothing is different with the capacity, the fullness, or the GIDs, but
the Bar is gone. Why, because that is the way Nissan designed
the Fullness-Bar meter to work, with about a half-Bar of hysteresis. :D
 
garygid said:
To account for losses and other factors, the LEAF monitors pack voltage
and substracts from the GID count as needed. This can be observed sometimes
when you turn the LEAF off and then on only to see a battery SOC bar disappear.
Minor point of information:

The vanishing battery fullness Bar has little to do with any adjustment of the
GIDs value. With NO change in the GID value, a bar will often "vanish" due to
the hysteresis in managing the Bars in the display.

While driving, a Bar will persist (continue to be displayed) until the Bar is
empty, then it disappears. From 11.0 down to 10.01 the 11th Bar shows
(while displaying a generally declining battery pack "fullness").

However, when starting up the car (like when charging), a bar is displayed
only if it is half full, or more. So, from 10.01 to 10.49 the 11th Bar is NOT
displayed.

Thus, driving along with 8 Bars showing, and the "fullness" is 7.3 (anywhere
between 7.01 and 7.49). Stop, turn the car Off and back On, and...
PRESTO, the 8th bar is gone!

Nothing is different with the capacity, the fullness, or the GIDs, but
the Bar is gone. Why, because that is the way Nissan designed
the Fullness-Bar meter to work, with about a half-Bar of hysteresis. :D

My casual observations align well with Gary's analysis.
 
dm33 said:
TonyWilliams said:
dm33 said:
Which value is correct?

Both are correct. 300 Gid * 80 = 24kWh
Whoa. Lots of numbers and values.

Yes, lots of numbers. I have spent a lot of time actually driving electric powered cars, and knowing how far they go is important to me, given their limited range and limited public recharging infrastructure. Twice, I have driven between Canada and Mexico, last year in a LEAF and this year in a Toyota Rav4 EV.

To put it a different way.... when the car reports 4.1 mi/kwh, which kWh are we talking about. I assume not from the wall. I would think the value someone wants to know while they're looking at an app in the car is the kWh that related to the car reported efficiency (mi/kwh) so you can estimate range.

The kWh calculated with a Gid=80Wh value with no adjustments for energy that is never accessible at the bottom of the SOC%, nor compensated for battery temperature has marginal value for range calculations. The 4.1 miles per kWh that you reference needs to be calculated:

4.1 * (battery usable stored energy) = range autonomy in miles

The usable stored energy is simply:

(Gid = "281" - 6) * 77 = 21.1kWh for that fully charged, new condition 70F battery, creating:

4.1 * 21.1 = 86.5 miles range autonomy at 70F battery temperature

With adjustments to the battery capacity for temperature, now that same battery at 30F degrees holds:

21.1 * (70F - 30F = 40F delta / 4F =10% loss) = about 19kWh usable, therefore:

4.1 * 19 = 77.9 miles

Is it 84 mile range at 62mph at 4.1mi/kwh? 20.48 kWh. Figuring 281 Gids, thats 73 watts/Gid.


As previously stated, the usable Gid value is variable, primarily with temperature. Internal battery resistance with degradation is another factor.


What would a user want to see for kWh displayed in an app. 80watts/kwh to be consistent w the Android Leaf app? Some other value? Are Gids better for a user to use to guestimate range rather than kWh?

Gids are absolutely the best tool so far to estimate range. If the kWh displayed in the LEAF Spy app showed:

[(Gid - 6) * 0.0775] * [100% - (70F - battery temperature = temp delta... if positive value, divide by 4... if negative value, divide by 8)] = usable kWh compatible with dash economy reading.

So, either 75 to 77.5 watthours per Gid is a good baseline.

Then, you could always look at your dash miles/kWh economy information and multiply it by the displayed kWh and get the range.

Let's try is with my old, degraded yet fully charged LEAF in an Edmonton, BC typical January day @ -10F degrees:

[(230 - 6) * 0.0775] * [100% - (70F - (-10F) = 80 / 4)] = 13.89kWh usable * 4.1 = 56.9 miles autonomy


I would recommend that the displayed kWh match the DTE data, instead of being calculated differently when using my formulas for compensation.

And to make sure I understand.... there is no kWh measurement reported by the Leaf. Only Gids...

And amphours (Ah) and voltage. I believe the current LEAF Spy app display of kWh is merely Ah * nominal voltage (sorry, I'm not sure of the exact method of calculation since if it's not useful data for range estimation, I really don't care how it's calculated).
 
TonyWilliams said:
I believe the current LEAF Spy app display of kWh is merely Ah * nominal voltage (sorry, I'm not sure of the exact method of calculation since if it's not useful data for range estimation, I really don't care how it's calculated).
That has changed. Since Jim was able to get real GIDs off the CAN bus, he is using 80 Wh per GID to calculate the total stored energy. I did not use the app recently to tell you if battery charging and discharging efficiency is taken into account, but Jim confirmed above that he has implemented temperature correction. He also subtracts the fixed reserve at the bottom. I believe that it's user adjustable, and one can select how much reserve should be loped off the indicated stored energy. I think Jim needs to be lobbied to changed the GID multiplier from 80 to something else. Perhaps this could be exposed as an adjustable value in the preferences as well? That could be more easily understood than a battery efficiency factor, which was proposed earlier.
 
surfingslovak said:
TonyWilliams said:
I believe the current LEAF Spy app display of kWh is merely Ah * nominal voltage (sorry, I'm not sure of the exact method of calculation since if it's not useful data for range estimation, I really don't care how it's calculated).
That has changed. Since Jim was able to get real GIDs off the CAN bus, he is using 80 Wh per GID to calculate the total stored energy. I did not use the app recently to tell you if battery charging and discharging efficiency is taken into account, but Jim confirmed above that he has implemented temperature correction. He also subtracts the fixed reserve at the bottom. I believe that it's user adjustable, and one can select how much reserve should be loped off the indicated stored energy. I think Jim needs to be lobbied to changed the GID multiplier from 80 to something else. Perhaps this could be exposed as an adjustable value in the preferences as well? That could be more easily understood than a battery efficiency factor, which was proposed earlier.

We're making progress then!!

Yes, a very simple user adjustment of 75 to 80 watt/hours per Gid in 0.5 increments would finally get all DTE and kWh data compatible. I would have it DEFAULT to 77.5
 
I thought that the 80 Wh was the energy applied to the battery,
and less is actually stored in the battery. Then, less than that is
available, since there are losses when extracting energy from
the battery, just as there are losses when filling the battery?

So, maybe something like 78 is stored and 76 is actually recovered for use?

Just asking TMWK (the man who knows).
Thanks, Gary
 
garygid said:
I thought that the 80 Wh was the energy applied to the battery,
and less is actually stored in the battery. Then, less than that is
available, since there are losses when extracting energy from
the battery, just as there are losses when filling the battery?

So, maybe something like 78 is stored and 76 is actually recovered for use?

Just asking TMWK (the man who knows).
Thanks, Gary

The 80 value checks out perfectly against the government battery measurements. At 22.031kWh from the charger to the battery, plus the absolute likely minimum of 0.300kWh to 0.400kWh still in the battery, the total divided by 281 Gid equals 79.47 to 79.83 wattHours each.

Of course, we don't know that the government test actually showed 281 Gid. Just 280 Gid would put the value at 79.75 to 80.11. So, I'm glad we have non-Nissan lab results to back up our data.

The 21.381kWh actually recovered means there is a direct battery energy recovery loss of 21.381 / 22.031, or 97.05% efficient.

If we apply that 97.05% in this example to 80 wattHours, it becomes 77.64 per Gid for "energy from the battery during discharge".

Since they did this all in a lab at room temperature, it's perfect data to apply temperature correction factors to. But, the above example is why I chose 77.5 per Gid as the default. GIDs continue to be the gold standard for determining the only thing the end user cares about; usable capacity for range.

That usable battery capacity, with temperature correction and compensated for UNusable energy will generally align with the dash miles per kWh economy meter to get ultimate range.

The displayed kWh on the LEAF Spy app should reflect this data. Conversely, we get exactly the same ultimate result with continuing to call a Gid = 80 with a 97.05% correction factor.

Now, the app would show a 281 Gid battery at 70F temperature to have:


(((281 - 6 UNusable) * 80) * .9705 energy recovery factor) * 0% temp correction = 21.351kWh usable


Isn't is great how all that works out?

When the car is being driven at 4.1 miles per kWh, the DTE value in the app will show:


4.1 * 21.351 = 87.5 miles, or just about EXACTLY what it will actually do.


LEAF battery capacities

Energy from the wall from dead to 100%: 25.414 kWh
Energy from the onboard charger to battery: 22.031 kWh (86.6% charger efficiency)
Energy from the battery during discharge: 21.381 kWh (our generic "21kWh" useable at 70F)

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2012/veh_sys_sim/vss030_lohsebusch_2012_o.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/pdfs/merit_review_2012/adv_power_electronics/ape006_burress_2012_p.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
Why 281? The 2013s go to 284.. And shouldn't this discussion be in one of the many Gid or kWh threads and not active CAN sampling?
 
GregH said:
Why 281? The 2013s go to 284.. And shouldn't this discussion be in one of the many Gid or kWh threads and not active CAN sampling?

Well, 281 has been the typical highest value for most LEAFs, including the 2013 that I tested March 2013. Yes, there have been 2011-2012 that have had 282 and 283 (I don't think I've ever heard of 284), and many reports of 284 on the 2013 LEAF. 281 is the number that stuck. If you get 284, congrats, that might be worth almost another mile in range. With any app that would multiply the miles/kWh from the dash by the Gid with correction factors, that extra mile of 284 will be reflected in the range estimate.

I've been writing about this so long that I'm confident that you could find some variation of what I posted above in just about any pertinent thread in this forum. That includes from the very first time that Ingineer officially told us that a Gid was 80 watthours (well, it was actually disclosed at the Dec 3, 2011 Nissan Love-Fest at Google headquarters, which I attended). I disputed the 80 value then, explaining that just because Nissan says 80 doesn't make that useful for the end user for range calculations or available usable capacity.

I prefer accurate data, and I also want to accurately know how far I can drive.
 
With the help of a few LeafDD customers in colder climates, we can now extend the temperature translation table (first post of this thread) down to 0C.. and soon hopefully confirm down to -10C..
 
GregH said:
Why 281? The 2013s go to 284.. And shouldn't this discussion be in one of the many Gid or kWh threads and not active CAN sampling?
Is there a special trick to make it go to 284?
I've never seen more than 256 in mine.
 
GregH said:
With the help of a few LeafDD customers in colder climates, we can now extend the temperature translation table (first post of this thread) down to 0C.. and soon hopefully confirm down to -10C..
Very nice! These remain surprisingly linear - looks like extrapolation should be valid outside this range.
 

Attachments

  • tempadc.jpg
    tempadc.jpg
    21.3 KB · Views: 48
Tomasz said:
GregH said:
Why 281? The 2013s go to 284.. And shouldn't this discussion be in one of the many Gid or kWh threads and not active CAN sampling?
Is there a special trick to make it go to 284?
I've never seen more than 256 in mine.
Ha! Now there's a can of worms.. In olden times, the MNL Elders thought the highest possible Gid reading was 281 and thus many equations were postulated to calculate true SOC or capacity. Not really one to say "told ya so" (well ok, maybe) but of course newer batteries might well have slightly higher capacity or new software might tweak it to give slightly higher numbers. Sure enough SOME 2013 packs report 284. Oddly other new 2013s are surprisingly lower, but that's another topic. In the future we might get Leafs that go up to 300 Gids or beyond (we can only hope, right?)

Anyway.. the debate between SOC and remaining energy as far as best thing to gauge rages on.. Personally I'm dabbling with capacity*soc (reported as Ah, 4th option on LeafDD page 1), although I still like plain old raw Gids... Both of which might be considered remaining energy rather than SOC btw.

Rambling on and getting more philosophical.. What is "State of Charge" anyway? Who says it needs to be a % of full? Maybe remaining energy (be it Gids or Ah) is a better "State of Charge" anyway.
 
TickTock said:
GregH said:
With the help of a few LeafDD customers in colder climates, we can now extend the temperature translation table (first post of this thread) down to 0C.. and soon hopefully confirm down to -10C..
Very nice! These remain surprisingly linear - looks like extrapolation should be valid outside this range.

I know! Personally I'm shocked it's still 10 clicks per degree C all the way down to 0C.. I would have thought for sure the nonlinearity of the thermistor would have resulted in 12 or 13 clicks per degree C down in the colder realm (as it is confirmed 8 or 9 on the hot side). Could it be the Leaf's own temperature calcs are lazily linear? And in the end, do we care what the real temps are or what the trigger points for things like temp bars and battery heaters is?
 
Back
Top