Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

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.
abasile said:
This is the sort of issue that leads to calls for more regulation. Perhaps all EV manufacturers should be forced to disclose metrics related to battery life, such as coulombic efficiency which has been shown to be a proxy for how rapidly a Li-ion battery is likely to degrade.

they could provide it and the 3 people who would read it would undoubtedly come away with more insight...

but as we all know; charts and graphs will do nothing. Nissan put out a chart that was actually quite realistic (if you could find those driving conditions that is...) and it did nothing... Very few knew about it and even less could extrapolate the data into their personal existence.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
they could provide it and the 3 people who would read it would undoubtedly come away with more insight...

but as we all know; charts and graphs will do nothing. Nissan put out a chart that was actually quite realistic (if you could find those driving conditions that is...) and it did nothing... Very few knew about it and even less could extrapolate the data into their personal existence.
It would probably need to be distilled and simplified for a mass audience, but be based on measurable standards.

The metric could be "average battery life expectancy" in years, i.e., 4.6 years before dropping below 80% capacity (maybe for a LEAF).

If properly implemented, this could be nearly as useful as the EPA range ratings for EVs, which are watched very closely.

The downside is that regulations like this could lengthen the path to market for battery improvements. As the market matures, though, this might be a reasonable tradeoff.
 
I'm almost certain that degradation is mostly because of heated cells during charging. Since April I've lost 2 bars. I have quick charged about 90 times since then. I watched it go from a 16kw batter to a 14.6kw battery all based on 115 degree quick charging in this Bakersfield summer heat.

I know most wouldn't approve of this type of use but it's what I got.. I drive my kids to school and it's about 100 miles a day. I have to fast charge 2 times a day now that school is back in.
 
Philipr144 said:
based on 115 degree quick charging in this Bakersfield summer heat.

YIKES! My best advice? Move. I installed fiberglass insulation one summer in Bakersfield at 115 F, and I about died. I had a broken swamp cooler I learned how to fix REAL FAST. Won't do that again. Visalia, Dinuba, Fresno and similar towns up north are much cooler, and should have similar home prices.

115 F, no thanks...
 
:lol: When I lived in San Francisco, I had two friends from Bakersfield, and visited there a few times, including once in July or August. Wow. Now in Seattle, if anyone says "Oh, it's so hot today!" I ask, with as much scorn as I can muster, "Have you even HEARD of Bakersfield?"
 
Philipr144 said:
I'm almost certain that degradation is mostly because of heated cells during charging. Since April I've lost 2 bars. I have quick charged about 90 times since then. I watched it go from a 16kw batter to a 14.6kw battery all based on 115 degree quick charging in this Bakersfield summer heat.
Battery capacity is measured in kWh, not "kw". And, I don't put any stake in assertions that someone has x kWh in the battery or remaining per Leaf Spy. See http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=472552#p472552 and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=476092#p476092.
 
cwerdna said:
I don't put any stake in assertions that someone has x kWh in the battery or remaining per Leaf Spy.
What metric do you use ?

I follow Ahr and try to measure at 80% SoC for consistent voltage readings since I'm most interested in trends.
Of course, for all I know the SoC is based on voltage so I may be chasing my own tail.

It does not take me long to get very confused by the subtleties involved in battery health evaluation.
 
SageBrush said:
cwerdna said:
I don't put any stake in assertions that someone has x kWh in the battery or remaining per Leaf Spy.
What metric do you use ?

I follow Ahr and try to measure at 80% SoC for consistent voltage readings since I'm most interested in trends.
Of course, for all I know the SoC is based on voltage so I may be chasing my own tail.

It does not take me long to get very confused by the subtleties involved in battery health evaluation.

kwh available can be altered by changing GID setting. On my 30 kwh LEAF, if GID = 77.5 wh, the kwh available is 28.1 If GID = 80 wh, the kwh available is 29 kwh.

As far as what metric you should look at the most? Imm, it would be a mistake to not look at all 5. Currently my pack is degraded (after 25,000 miles how could it not be??) but 3 of the 5 metrics; SOH, kwh available and GIDs (obviously) say no degradation.

So if you had to limit yourself, I would pick Hx and ahr since they are the only two that states my battery is no longer "perfect"
 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/nissan.leaf.owners.group/permalink/1670311866372981/ is supposedly a 6 capacity bar car for sale on Craigslist w/75.5K miles and 27 miles showing on the GOM at 12 fuel bars. Vehicle history unclear but the OP of that thread says LA for the area.
 
SageBrush said:
cwerdna said:
I don't put any stake in assertions that someone has x kWh in the battery or remaining per Leaf Spy.
What metric do you use ?
To evaluate battery condition, I'd look at AHr, SOH and Hx. # of gids on a full charge is a bonus.

And, if it's a used car, it is critical to get a Carfax/Autocheck to see if the numbers line up the car's build month and previous climate.
 
cwerdna said:
SageBrush said:
cwerdna said:
I don't put any stake in assertions that someone has x kWh in the battery or remaining per Leaf Spy.
What metric do you use ?
To evaluate battery condition, I'd look at AHr, SOH and Hx. # of gids on a full charge is a bonus.

And, if it's a used car, it is critical to get a Carfax/Autocheck to see if the numbers line up the car's build month and previous climate.

Agreed. keep in mind Hx and ahr are very reactive, SOH is not. IOW, SOH will likely give you a somewhat better indication of the pack health while Hx and ahr can give you an idea of recent charging history. The key is looking at the spread of the different numbers. They "should" align with each other.

In packs with problems, I am seeing things like SOH at 75%, Hx at 85%. This seems to be a red flag of sorts to look at. IF reversed, not as bad I think. Keep in mind this is only A VERY GENERAL OBSERVATION I HAVE NOTICED.

To illustrate my point, I show two pix of my 2013 LEAF, approx two weeks before return and one a few mins before turning LEAF over to dealership

Remembering new LEAF stats 67.36 ahr;

first pix taken just before period of GREATLY reduced usage. ahr 59.97 or apporx 89% of new. a few points below SOH, Hx (which generally match each other. This is a bit of a rare pix...)

2nd pix taken a few mins before turn over to Ray at Campbell Nelson Nissan in Everett when I picked up my 2016 S 30.

ahr 57.96 or about 86%. Notice still a few points below SOH/Hx which are now back to "normal" in their usual sync.



2013 LEAF two weeks before turn in sm.png



2013 LEAF turn in sm.png

Now is all this meaningful? You decide... I am just putting it out there. ;)
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
Now is all this meaningful?
I doubt it, at least not in the way you said that it represents "reactive" changes.

I'm more inclined to say it means that trending a car should be carried out at the same SoC over time.
I'm going to use 100% charge for my LEAF but I can understand others who might prefer LBC. Until now I have tried to do my periodic checks at 80% SoC since it is convenient and matches our usual charging routine but I'm less convinced now of the accuracy
 
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Now is all this meaningful?
I doubt it, at least not in the way you said that it represents "reactive" changes.

I'm more inclined to say it means that trending a car should be carried out at the same SoC over time.
I'm going to use 100% charge for my LEAF but I can understand others who might prefer LBC. Until now I have tried to do my periodic checks at 80% SoC since it is convenient and matches our usual charging routine but I'm less convinced now of the accuracy

80%? why 80% If I was checking battery stats, it would be at full charge so at least I have a real idea of the capacity its supposed to have.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Now is all this meaningful?
I doubt it, at least not in the way you said that it represents "reactive" changes.

I'm more inclined to say it means that trending a car should be carried out at the same SoC over time.
I'm going to use 100% charge for my LEAF but I can understand others who might prefer LBC. Until now I have tried to do my periodic checks at 80% SoC since it is convenient and matches our usual charging routine but I'm less convinced now of the accuracy

80%? why 80% If I was checking battery stats, it would be at full charge so at least I have a real idea of the capacity its supposed to have.
As I said, I was using 80% out of convenience.
My layman's understanding of battery aging is that we should capture battery internal resistance changes. I'm somewhat guessing that this has both Ahr and Voltage components so checks at LBC make intuitive sense to me but I don't find that practical.
 
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
SageBrush said:
I doubt it, at least not in the way you said that it represents "reactive" changes.

I'm more inclined to say it means that trending a car should be carried out at the same SoC over time.
I'm going to use 100% charge for my LEAF but I can understand others who might prefer LBC. Until now I have tried to do my periodic checks at 80% SoC since it is convenient and matches our usual charging routine but I'm less convinced now of the accuracy

80%? why 80% If I was checking battery stats, it would be at full charge so at least I have a real idea of the capacity its supposed to have.
As I said, I was using 80% out of convenience.
My layman's understanding of battery aging is that we should capture battery internal resistance changes. I'm somewhat guessing that this has both Ahr and Voltage components so checks at LBC make intuitive sense to me but I don't find that practical.

ah gotcha. Yeah, not a real fan of that either. the numbers bounce around so much that getting in a twit over a day's reading or even a week's worth is simply....weird.

I simply check and log my stats every morning and yeah, most of the time the car is fully charged but not always. It all depends on where I am going that day and when. My job means I travel anywhere from 5 to 437 miles (based on mileage logs submitted to my employer over the past 2 years) round trip per day.

Recently I posted a guideline that was put in a chart format that I swiped off the net somewhere. I liked it because it was a basic guideline but in a format that could be understood by the uninitiated at a glance. But wanted to reference it since the pix I got was super low rez and was hoping for a better pix so I started searching battery sites to try and find it and found a lot of interesting info on LEAF battery packs, testing procedures and why they were ineffective, etc. But the key takeaway was the huge effect of high SOC and warm temps so on days where I am getting a "late" start (which is anytime after 7 AM, I will frequently plug in the car when I get up instead of the night before.

Doing this gives me 2-3 hours of charging which can be more than enough for my needs of the day. This is partially the reason why I think my next LEAF will be the one I keep for decade. It will simply allow me to to cover 90% of my needs without having to have a full charge the night before. The last 10% I will cover with public charging.
 
@DaveinOly, please clarify the effects you read about re: SoC and temperature.

I know that temperature causes a proportional change to internal resistance. What else ?
 
SageBrush said:
@DaveinOly, please clarify the effects you read about re: SoC and temperature.

I know that temperature causes a proportional change to internal resistance. What else ?

nothing but what we already know. High SOC and temps don't mix. We all wonder why Nissan had so much confidence in a battery chemistry that failed so miserably but it was the testing process that misled them.

Nissan took a pack, cycled it 500 times over the course of a month at 60ºC which as we know makes Phoenix seem like Alaska and it came out with less than 10% degradation.

the cycling was supposed to represent two years of average driving but as we all know that didn't work out when reality was added so what went wrong?

Testing shows that its not the high temps but the combination of time and high temps. The cycling was done so fast (charged at 1.5 C, discharged at 2.5 C and repeated in roughly 80 min cycles) that time at high SOC and the issues that would create was minimized despite the crazy high temps that existed for the entire month of testing.

The other thing that came out of the testing was that cycling was a VERY small player in the degradation process. It exists but to a much smaller degree. This is why we have 100,000 mile LEAFs with one or no bars missing. Its because they piled on the miles very quickly which means time at high SOC was simply not possible because to get that kind of mileage, the car was not sitting overnight, it was pretty much being used very soon after the charging was done.

So what we have here is our previous beliefs that multiple fast charges in the noon day Sun was killing our packs and shouldn't be done when the reality was the real killer is the fully charged LEAF sitting in a garage in temps as low as the 80's and 90's

But my experiments (yeah those AGAIN) has "so far" proven otherwise. It would appear that it doesn't really matter how hot the pack gets as long as you drive it right away (adding more heat btw...) reducing the SOC meaning that temps do play a part but only in certain situations. If you have been following my blog you would know I have done everything I possibly can to create and enhance heat related degradation besides moving to the desert and the results? Scroll up to see my latest battery stats.

so my take?

finish charging as close to your departure time as you can and don't charge to 100% if your one way destination does not drop you to 80% SOC or lower.

Don't charge at work on L2 AT ALL if you do not absolutely need it to make it home and even then, I would still recommend you stopping on the way home for a 15 min QC instead. Reasons are L2 is too slow and its simply a few hours at high SOC during the hottest part of the day.
This I have come to believe is THE NUMBER ONE SOURCE OF DEGRADATION for many of the people here.

**edit** sorry, this is not post I put battery stats in... I guess its somewhere else here?

2016 LEAF stat 10-2017 LEAF Spy 2.png

2016 LEAF Stats   10-3-2017.png
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
when the reality was the real killer is the fully charged LEAF sitting in a garage in temps as low as the 80's and 90's
In the summer I keep my LEAF outside in the shade and charge to 80% in the early AM (usually followed by an early day drive) for just these reasons, although the behavior is not backed up by good data.

Too bad we do not have a DaveInPhoenix who behaves like you to act as a paired control. Your opinions somewhat boil down to this: the battery would do fine if people stopped letting their cars sit in the heat at 100% SoC. I doubt it is that simple, and it surely should make you wonder why Nissan would agree to remove the 80% charge option or at least do what they could to encourage people to finish up charging proximate to the first drive of the day, and to encourage the use of L2 charging. No corporate behavior or body of anecdota support your view.

Which is not say I disagree, since I came to the same conclusions and act the same way. I'm just not as confident as you are in my choices. They will not hurt, but I'm skeptical about how much I can do to extend battery life. Mostly I still think that

1. the LEAF battery in general sucks. Sometimes people get lucky; cooking the battery at un-needed SoC and temperature more than needed is foolish, and ambient temperatures are a first order variable.
2. Battery QA is poor with a lot of variation. The occasional very good battery and large batches of poor to mediocre batteries adds to the noise in trying to sort out what matters in the mountain of anecdotal data.
 
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
when the reality was the real killer is the fully charged LEAF sitting in a garage in temps as low as the 80's and 90's
I keep my LEAF outside in the summer shade and charge to 80% in the early AM for just these reasons, although the behavior is not backed up by good data.

Too bad we do not have a DaveInPhoenix who behaves like you to act as a paired control.

:shock: :? :lol: :lol:

The reality is all the data we need is here.... buried under 2,229,509 garbage posts. The real problem is we didn't know what was important so we get all these "I live in Sunny Coastal San Diego which is a super mild climate so I shouldn't be getting degradation"

yeah right but you take advantage of your Employers free L2 to keep from paying 30 cents per kwh at home and guess what??

that dollar you saved SCREWED YOU OVER BIG TIME!!
 
Back
Top