Simplified Range Testing

[KJD]

The purpose of this test was to get some baseline numbers on my car and compare it to the testing done recently by Tony and the Phoenix group. I liked the detail of the testing done, but in my case I wanted to change a few things to make it easier to repeat the test in the future.

The main difference in my testing and the PHX testing is that I only run the car down to LBW and not all the way to turtle mode. There are a couple of reasons I did this 1) I do not want to damage the car towing it 2) I want to be able to run the test anytime and not have the hassle of waiting for a tow vehicle or another driver to pick me up in a chase vehicle. By only going to LBW I can still move under my own power and find the nearest charge station on the GPS and refill the pack.

I also feel that deep discharges will shorten the battery life which I want to avoid. I also feel that LBW is consistant at 49 GIDS and enough people have already done this and I feel no need to do it again.

The test route I chose was a freeway route around the Salt Lake City area that enabled me to stay close to home and the charging stations that I am familiar with. There are very few level roads around here but the 215 freeway only has one high point and by using a somewhat circular route the effect of the up and down hill would somewhat cancel each other out. The circular route would also mitigate the wind factor to some degree.

About the car
2012 model SL LEAF
8300 miles
270 GID to start.
392.5 volts
63 degrees on the dash car temp.
Freeway driving was done at 65 mph with the cruise control set on.

For those familiar with SLC my route was as follows starting at my residence in Sugarhouse area of SLC.
East on 1300 south.
South on Foothill Blvd towards freeway entrance.
Enter I-215 Southbound ( 3 miles from start)
Follow I-215 westbound
Follow I-215 Northbound
Turn East onto I-80 ( by the airport)
Turn South on I-15
Turn East on next leg of I-80 and proceed towards freeway starting point and I-215.
On intersection of 215 South this completes one loop of the valley.

After completing just more than 2 loops of this route I had logged 74.5 miles. The GID meter was at 56, so very close to LBW and I took the next exit and headed back home by the shortest route on city streets.

This was the fourth time I have done this test. The other 3 tests were slightly different route and showed shorter ranges due to the different route. The temps today were much cooler than last month, not sure how much that changed the results.

9-8-2012 68.8 miles
9-9-2012 66.3 miles
9-16-2012 66.8 miles
10-08-2012 74.5 miles

In summary all tests were from 100% charge to LBW. The driving speed was 65 MPH by the speedometer in the car.
According to Tonys chart there would be 11 miles left in the pack at LBW, so with the miles driven I feel the battery pack is still in pretty good shape after 10 months and 8,000 miles.

Now that I have a preferred route I will do this test again and compare the results.

 

[TonyWilliams]

This was the fourth time I have done this test. The other 3 tests were slightly different route and showed shorter ranges due to the different route. The temps today were much cooler than last month, not sure how much that changed the results.
9-16-2012 66.8 miles
10-08-2012 74.5 miles

That's a significant different there. Why? Just different routes doesn't change energy consumption (unless it was up and down hill, or driven at a different speed, etc).

Confirm you had about 4.0 miles/kWh.

 

[DaveEV]

Nice loop. Does have about 700 ft of elevation change.

Here's a link for those who wish to visualize it: https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=E+1300+S&daddr=40.63816,-111.80854+to:40.64995,-111.95132+to:40.76576,-111.93518+to:I-80+E&hl=en&ll=40.699642,-111.858673&spn=0.203804,0.293884&sll=40.706669,-111.838074&sspn=0.407563,0.587769&geocode=FQirbQIdLGxV-Q%3BFdAWbAId5O9V-SkpXIm3rGNShzHTMA9Z6-L7-Q%3BFd5EbAIdKMJT-SmJJjv1_otShzEYtLxeG4x7iA%3BFUAJbgIdNAFU-SkfGFwHY_RShzEq47x7Fjia1w%3BFbk_bQIdN_RV-Q&t=h&mra=dvme&mrsp=3&sz=11&via=1,2,3&z=12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What were the temps of your other tests?

With 6-8 mile difference from your recent test that's a 1.5-2 kWh difference in energy used.

 

[KJD]

By the center console I was over 4.0 miles/kwh on each of the 4 tests. I have the numbers written down but not with me right now. I will try and post them later.

The different routes involved where I entered the Freeway. The first 3 times I entered at I-80 and 1300 east, so it was a slight downhill from the house and then once on the freeway up the steepest part of the route. The high point on the route is the Northeast corner. Entering at I-80 meant that I had to go from zero to 65 up a steep hill. That could be part of it.

The other thing that was different was the first 3 tests I did not go north of I-80. This meant the loop was smaller and I climbed the steep part 3 times instead of 2 times. As Drees noted in the next post about a 700 foot climb from lowest point to highest point.

The third thing that changed was the ambient temp. It was a fair bit cooler yesterday. For the last month my GID count has been going up slightly, so maybe that is part of it. The other thing I wondered about was how the different temps affect rolling resistance of the tires on the cement pavement. How do temps affect friction in the drivetrain of the car. Oil and Grease and clearances change with temp.

So yes I agree I have some information, but I also have more questions. I guess that means more testing in weeks to come.

This was the fourth time I have done this test. The other 3 tests were slightly different route and showed shorter ranges due to the different route. The temps today were much cooler than last month, not sure how much that changed the results.
9-16-2012 66.8 miles
10-08-2012 74.5 miles

That's a significant different there. Why? Just different routes doesn't change energy consumption (unless it was up and down hill, or driven at a different speed, etc).

Confirm you had about 4.0 miles/kWh.

 

[KJD]

Nice loop. Does have about 700 ft of elevation change.

Here's a link for those who wish to visualize it: https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=E+1300+S&daddr=40.63816,-111.80854+to:40.64995,-111.95132+to:40.76576,-111.93518+to:I-80+E&hl=en&ll=40.699642,-111.858673&spn=0.203804,0.293884&sll=40.706669,-111.838074&sspn=0.407563,0.587769&geocode=FQirbQIdLGxV-Q%3BFdAWbAId5O9V-SkpXIm3rGNShzHTMA9Z6-L7-Q%3BFd5EbAIdKMJT-SmJJjv1_otShzEYtLxeG4x7iA%3BFUAJbgIdNAFU-SkfGFwHY_RShzEq47x7Fjia1w%3BFbk_bQIdN_RV-Q&t=h&mra=dvme&mrsp=3&sz=11&via=1,2,3&z=12" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What were the temps of your other tests?

With 6-8 mile difference from your recent test that's a 1.5-2 kWh difference in energy used.

Thanks for doing the google maps, that makes it much easier to see what was going on.

How did you arrive at the elevation change, was that from google maps also ?

I watched the elevation numbers on GPS info screen but did not post them last night and yes I agree about 700 foot change.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

i have also been mulling over this as well. general consensus says best way to standardize charge used for test is run from 80% charge to LBW. as you have stated, LBW is pretty consistently at 48 or 49 GID which is 17.7% more than enough to get back home and avoiding an SOC that might increase degradation.

i have kind of decided to use a route that is traveled frequently that comes close to this range but have an issue that one does come close but SO (who would be driving most of the time) requires 100% charge which as Phil as mentioned is not as consistent as the 80% charge.

the other thing about charging to 80% then turning on the heat and lights to me is a waste of energy and that is not why i drive the LEAF

 

[Herm]

The simplest test, and the most universal is the one Nissan uses.. just run the heater on maximum with the windows open and time it.. local temperature and manufacturing variability in the heater coils will affect the results but it has to be less than local winds, tire break-in, traffic and variable temperatures while driving in a loop. Everyone can do this test at home when the car is new, all you need is about 5 hours and a stopwatch.

 

[TonyWilliams]

The simplest test, and the most universal is the one Nissan uses.. just run the heater on maximum with the windows open and time it.. local temperature and manufacturing variability in the heater coils will affect the results but it has to be less than local winds, tire break-in, traffic and variable temperatures while driving in a loop. Everyone can do this test at home when the car is new, all you need is about 5 hours and a stopwatch.

To my knowledge, nobody has posted that they've done this test. Simple and universal, yes. Useful, I don't know.

All the issues that you present for a drive are all issues that can be mitigated. And it doesn't take 5 hours.

 

[DaveEV]

How did you arrive at the elevation change, was that from google maps also ?

GPS Visualizer. Go here: http://www.gpsvisualizer.com/profile_input" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Copy/paste the URL from Google Maps using the link button and adjust parameters to suit.

general consensus says best way to standardize charge used for test is run from 80% charge to LBW. as you have stated, LBW is pretty consistently at 48 or 49 GID which is 17.7% more than enough to get back home and avoiding an SOC that might increase degradation.

Unless you drive to turtle (or at least VLBW), you simply don't have an accurate picture of your range because it's been shown that GIDs get bigger below LBW and the effect seems to be worse either when it's been warm for a while and/or on degraded batteries. And unless you charge to 100% and balance your pack, you can't be sure that your pack is balanced all that well.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The simplest test, and the most universal is the one Nissan uses.. just run the heater on maximum with the windows open and time it.. local temperature and manufacturing variability in the heater coils will affect the results but it has to be less than local winds, tire break-in, traffic and variable temperatures while driving in a loop. Everyone can do this test at home when the car is new, all you need is about 5 hours and a stopwatch.

To my knowledge, nobody has posted that they've done this test. Simple and universal, yes. Useful, I don't know.

All the issues that you present for a drive are all issues that can be mitigated. And it doesn't take 5 hours.

+1 and i will opt to use a route that i travel frequently, average the numbers and mitigate what doesnt fit. i have lost the desire to find out if i can go 84 miles or if i can only go 80.

unless its part of my life, its getting to be a non issue. there is more than enough scenarios that are part of my life i can use to judge my degradation and GIDs may not be the "be all" answer but its a good enough guideline for me.

just knowing GIDs has already given me at least a 10% boost in range. before the GID meter, i had done several range attempts and in retrospect, stopped way short of the real range while thinking i was pushing my luck

heck; i drove 100 miles in the dead of winter! (granted it was a "LA4" type drive) and did it because i could see i had 10 GID left and was good to go for at least a few more miles!

 

[adric22]

Why can't we all just drive our cars until we get LBW, then come back to our home neighborhood streets and just do circles around the block until the car hits turtle. With any luck you can still make it to your garage, or worst case have somebody push you into your garage.

Once in the garage, recharge the car on 120V using a kill-a-watt meter and see how much power is consumed during the recharge to 100%?

Wouldn't this be the easiest way to compare battery capacity from different areas?

 

[TickTock]

it's been shown that GIDs get bigger below LBW

Can you provide a reference? I've heard this mentioned before but haven't yet seen any data supporting this claim (haven't seen data conflicting with it either).

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Why can't we all just drive our cars until we get LBW, then come back to our home neighborhood streets and just do circles around the block until the car hits turtle. With any luck you can still make it to your garage, or worst case have somebody push you into your garage.

Once in the garage, recharge the car on 120V using a kill-a-watt meter and see how much power is consumed during the recharge to 100%?

Wouldn't this be the easiest way to compare battery capacity from different areas?

i dont really live in that kind of neighborhood. i guess i could drive a mile or two down the street, make a u-turn and come back but with GID meter, i am good

 

[DaveEV]

it's been shown that GIDs get bigger below LBW

Can you provide a reference? I've heard this mentioned before but haven't yet seen any data supporting this claim (haven't seen data conflicting with it either).

I'll have to dig them up (not having any luck at this moment), but I know it was mentioned in the range test threads where people watching the gid-meters below LBW noticed that they were going much farther per gid than earlier. I think it was surfingslovak who noticed this during the test and I believe that Stoaty has independently verified this if my memory is correct (it may not be!).

 

[Stoaty]

it's been shown that GIDs get bigger below LBW

Can you provide a reference? I've heard this mentioned before but haven't yet seen any data supporting this claim (haven't seen data conflicting with it either).

That has been my impression, backed up by the test linked in my signature. For the first round trip home to work and back, I got 2.58 Gids per mile, while for the second using the lower portion of the battery I got 2.19. Thats 15% less Gids per mile. The only caveat is that I did a small amount of driving (10 miles) at lunch time in the second round trip from home so wasn't exactly comparable, but since I drive like an old lady it shouldn't make much difference. :lol:

Perhaps I will do a test again soon where the route is exactly the same to provide more data to back up my impression.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

i will say my first 10 GIDs on a full tank go fast and that the last 30-50 GIDs appear to go slower and the rest go at just under .3 miles each

 

[TickTock]

i will say my first 10 GIDs on a full tank go fast and that the last 30-50 GIDs appear to go slower and the rest go at just under .3 miles each

It's all the extra weight from the extra charge! (80 nanograms by my math ) Actually, the lack of regen could explain faster drop after a 100% charge.

 

[Herm]

To my knowledge, nobody has posted that they've done this test. Simple and universal, yes. Useful, I don't know.
All the issues that you present for a drive are all issues that can be mitigated. And it doesn't take 5 hours.

Its not a useful test if you did not do it when the car was new.. I guess most people just do not worry about batteries wearing out. Also very hard to brag my car lasted 5 hours running the heater

Do you remember when I proposed putting the car up on jackstands and just running the motor until it cut-off?.. the heater test is simpler, no jackstands required.

 

[LEAFfan]

LBW is pretty consistently at 48 or 49 GID which is 17.7%

LBW is always at 17.4%, VLBW is always at 8.5%, and Turtle varies depending on speed...2.4% at faster speeds and 1.4% at slow speeds.

 

[TonyWilliams]

it's been shown that GIDs get bigger below LBW

Can you provide a reference? I've heard this mentioned before but haven't yet seen any data supporting this claim (haven't seen data conflicting with it either).

I'll have to dig them up (not having any luck at this moment), but I know it was mentioned in the range test threads where people watching the gid-meters below LBW noticed that they were going much farther per gid than earlier. I think it was surfingslovak who noticed this during the test and I believe that planet4ever has independently verified this if my memory is correct (it may not be!).

I don't think the Gids are intentionally different at the low end, but many cars were. What's worse, is it was not uniform. My car, Black782, performed just like Red244 that I own previously.

I think it's just bad (hall effect) instruments in some cars, because there are some that are significantly out there. Others, not so much. You can't make a judgement either way with individual cars, until you observe how that car performs.