Had the P3227 reprogram done today: interesting results.

[TomT]

Hmmm... I wonder if they actually did the upgrade (correctly)...

The capacity and health numbers have finally changed, although the health number changed only slightly.

 

[dgpcolorado]

Hmmm... I wonder if they actually did the upgrade (correctly)...

I wondered that as well. He also did an earlier software update, the one that makes the car beep when the door is open and it is still on. I can say for sure that one was done: very annoying.

It also occurs to me that my car might not show much change with P3227, as compared to an older car such as yours, since it isn't as degraded yet. And I did get a fairly significant increase in Ah capacity eventually.

But I don't know what's really going on and was hoping some of the experts here would be able to figure it out.

 

[nosuchthing]

I think it's time for Nissan to tell us what this update is supposed to do, and if it's done as expected.

Hell, yeah!

 

[TomT]

Though I wish I had had it during the second week of ownership when I accidentally left it on for 12 hours at work and came out to find 4 bars (back when they were real bars) left...

He also did an earlier software update, the one that makes the car beep when the door is open and it is still on. I can say for sure that one was done: very annoying.

 

[myleaf]

I just had the update done on my LEAF done last Friday.

Before the update I had 9 bars and the Battery Ap showed 43AHr 66%

After the update I had 9 bars and the Battery Ap shows 51AHr 77%

I checked the range and it has increased significantly.

But as before I see the capacity dropping about 0.3% per day.

 

[TomT]

Enjoy it while you can! In a month it will be gone...

I checked the range and it has increased significantly.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

so In A Nutshell We Can Make What Suppositions With The Data We Have?

teTemperaturE adjustments Are Still In Effect Which Means GOM is No More Accurate Than Before And The Temporary incapacity and range is due to the battery pack readjusting after the
software upgrade

 

[TomT]

That's pretty much it. Other than the charger software improvements (which we have to take at face value since there is no way to validate them), there is really no lasting difference or improvement that is apparent from the outside...

so In A Nutshell We Can Make What Suppositions With The Data We Have?
the TemperaturE adjustments Are Still In Effect Which Means GOM is No More Accurate Than Before And The Temporary incapacity and range is due to the battery pack readjusting after the
software upgrade

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

That's pretty much it. Other than the charger software improvements (which we have to take at face value since there is no way to validate them), there is really no lasting difference or improvement that is apparent from the outside...

so In A Nutshell We Can Make What Suppositions With The Data We Have?
the TemperaturE adjustments Are Still In Effect Which Means GOM is No More Accurate Than Before And The Temporary incapacity and range is due to the battery pack readjusting after the
software upgrade

got up this morning and saw the OPPOSITE of everyone else. had software updated two weeks ago but have only driven LEAF a few times before taking trip out of town. Got home yesterday after car sat outside for a week. SOC was at 57% and started up no problem. But full charge this morning was only 251 GIDs when before I was running between 258 and 263.

the weather has been warmer than normal with temps hitting mid 80's today so hoping some of the capacity comes back when the weather cools off!

 

[myleaf]

The reprogram seems to cause inconsistent behavior:

My vehicle is in similar condition to TickTock's but I did not experience an increase in bars after the reprogram or a drop back to the original pre reprogram capacity.

I am now at 50.7AHr 76.5% H=58.4

My % capacity is gradually decreasing by ~0.3% per day as it has done before the reprogram.

 

[edatoakrun]

The reprogram seems to cause inconsistent behavior...

Understatement of the thread, IMO.

Almost sounds as if Nissan has just put out something to keep battery-capacity-obsessed LEAFers occupied...

But seriously, why should you expect that a software upgrade could significantly improve the displays, either on your dash or from the various aftermarket sources, when the problem (apparently) is the fundamental inaccuracy in LEAF instrumentation that caused the 2011-12 LEAF "gauge error" in the first place?

Is what has been posted many times on this subject, by Phil and many others, for years now, in dispute?

Ingineer Post subject: Re: LEAF voltage measurement accuracy impact on capacity

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2012 11:23 am

The biggest problem with the Leaf's BMS (in my opinion) is the use of the Hall-effect current sensor. These are not very accurate for coulomb counting and subject to accuracy degrading effects, such as centerline drift, effects of the earths magnetic field, temperature, etc. The inaccuracy of this is why "some gids are more equal than others". Nissan compensates for this inaccuracy by applying corrections to the SoC by sampling voltage and using it formulas that also take into account the temperature, internal resistance, aging, etc. This is why you can gain/lose SoC suddenly sometimes after power cycling. It will apply changes all at once if the car is power cycled, but if in use, it will apply a correction in the form of a drift which appears as faster/slower SoC counting than real energy out/in.

I was able to meet with the Nissan engineers from Japan last December, including the battery system engineer (I had a one-on-one with him). Their explanation for why we have no direct SoC display in the car was basically that they were afraid to show it and have these corrections occasionally make it "jump" which would "confuse the customer". The Battery Systems Engineer told me that cost was the reason they used the Hall-Effect current counter rather than a more-accurate galvanic shunt.

It's looking like there is some degradation in these hot-climate packs, but it appears that the BMS (LBC) is not dealing with it properly, and not only indicating incorrect loss figures, but also possibly not allowing for full use (charging) of the packs real capacity.

Keep in mind, Nissan did a lot of testing, but the bulk of it is accelerated life tests, which attempt to simulate a much longer real-world use scenario. Unfortunately sometimes there is no substitute for real-world life testing, and it sounds like there are some unexpected results that the BMS software is not equipped to deal with...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=9981&p=228473" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[TickTock]

Almost sounds as if Nissan has just put out something to keep battery-capacity-obsessed LEAFers occupied...

:lol:

But seriously, why should you expect that a software upgrade could significantly improve the displays, either on your dash or from the various aftermarket sources, when the problem (apparently) is the fundamental inaccuracy in LEAF instrumentation that caused the 2011-12 LEAF "gauge error" in the first place?

Is what has been posted many times on this subject, by Phil and many others, for years now, in dispute?

Not at all. It is entirely possible to improve accuracy of instrumentation with s/w updates. Extra calibration algorithms can be implemented. Temperature and voltage coefficients added/updated, etc. I'm not saying it was improved, but it is certainly possible given we don't know what information Nissan has to work with.

 

[mwalsh]

A) The update is not achieving the expected results (whatever they were).

B) The update is achieving the expected results. They just aren't results we would get to see (yet?) in the instrumentation we have available to us (in which case, wouldn't it be helpful to know WHAT was achieved?).

C) The update wasn't supposed to achieve anything but placate us (which, if true, it obviously failed to do). Personally don't see the point of this, but anything is possible I suppose. :?

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

Got the letter. Haven't scheduled yet. Don't really care about accuracy, have more range than I need. But also mentions support for new EVSEs? What is this? The few stations I use all work fine. Not a lot of public charging anyway. Is it worth the few lost hours to have this done? Little over a year left on the lease.

 

[TomT]

Again, no good information from Nissan as to what it actually addresses (sense a trend here?), but rumor is that it addresses some of the issues that were causing chargers to fail with certain EVSEs like the G.E...

Got the letter. Haven't scheduled yet. Don't really care about accuracy, have more range than I need. But also mentions support for new EVSEs? What is this? The few stations I use all work fine. Not a lot of public charging anyway. Is it worth the few lost hours to have this done? Little over a year left on the lease.

 

[Nubo]

Guess I'm in no hurry to get this done and it can wait until my next battery check in December.

 

[edatoakrun]

="TickTock"... It is entirely possible to improve accuracy of instrumentation with s/w updates. Extra calibration algorithms can be implemented. Temperature and voltage coefficients added/updated, etc. I'm not saying it was improved, but it is certainly possible given we don't know what information Nissan has to work with.

Nissan has stated that this update is intended to bring the 2011-12s to 2013 MY standards of accuracy.

And I certainly believe it will...

 

[dgpcolorado]

Hmmm... I wonder if they actually did the upgrade (correctly)...

I did eventually see the changes in numbers you and others saw. Yesterday I showed 221 Gid for 80%, versus 216 before the P3227 update. And I got 263 Gid on a 100% charge versus 256-259 before. The battery capacity number jumped up a bit but is now decreasing, as you saw with your car. Just a guess, but I think my changes are smaller because my newer battery had less degradation going into the software update.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Hmmm... I wonder if they actually did the upgrade (correctly)...

I did eventually see the changes in numbers you and others saw. Yesterday I showed 221 Gid for 80%, versus 216 before the P3227 update. And I got 263 Gid on a 100% charge versus 256-259 before. The battery capacity number jumped up a bit but is now decreasing, as you saw with your car. Just a guess, but I think my changes are smaller because my newer battery had less degradation going into the software update.

well, I am seeing half of what most are seeing. After the update, my GID count did not increase but did start to decrease after a week or so. I have gone from about 263 to 248...

 

[EVerlasting]

I have been calling the local Nissan dealer's service staff at the Nissan of Denville, NJ, for the new update for 2011/2012 Leafs. They told me today that they still haven't received the update from Nissan. He also told me that its the same with all dealers in the area.

So its not just that we here on the East Coast and particularly in New Jersey live in the stone age of EVs, where we have zero QCL3 chargers, very few L2 chargers (Mostly at Nissan Dealerships where most Nissan Dealers deliberately park ICE cars at charging spots to prevent Leafs from charging), and now this: Our Nissan Dealers don't even have the update for 2011/2012 Leafs.