Page 162 of 193

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 2:20 pm
by LeftieBiker
WetEV wrote:Then we better consider the fact that Musk brags about not using automotive grade electronic components. Such as the 17 inch display in the Model S.

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/tes ... de-matters
Yikes. I especially "like" the "Dogs & children" thermal protection that is really there just to protect the display screen, and will still kill the aforementioned dogs & children.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 3:03 pm
by Oils4AsphaultOnly
LeftieBiker wrote:
WetEV wrote:Then we better consider the fact that Musk brags about not using automotive grade electronic components. Such as the 17 inch display in the Model S.

https://www.thedrive.com/tech/27989/tes ... de-matters
Yikes. I especially "like" the "Dogs & children" thermal protection that is really there just to protect the display screen, and will still kill the aforementioned dogs & children.
The formal name for it is "cabin overheat protection", which is different from dog mode (protects your dogs) and camper mode. The Drive piece simply found the non-altruistic justification for cabin overheat protection (which was deployed around Sept 2016). Once developed, dog mode and camper mode natually followed and offers better protection for the living things and aren't there to protect the screen.

Side note. I've seen my model 3 interior get to up 125F, and haven't seen any yellow banding yet. Probably needs a longer duration to take effect.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Tue May 14, 2019 7:13 pm
by lorenfb
goldbrick wrote: One possible scenario - and this is totally hypothetical ! - out of the millions or billions of possibilities would be something like the code had a bug that caused the system that read the battery voltage to not recalibrate itself as intended. So if the ADC that converts the battery voltage to a number for the BMS changed over time (and virtually all silicon devices change characteristics over time, temperature, use, etc) then the voltage reported to the BMS would be incorrect. Now imagine that there are multiple vendors and batches of these ADC parts. Then different cars would exhibit different behaviors over time. Fixing the software to recalibrate the part as needed would eliminate the problem and the BMS would get a more accurate reading of the actual battery voltage, as it would now be unaffected by the errors in the ADC.
Seriously doubt that system designers would not have the considered the potential of an ADC's reference voltage drift over time. Most likely
there's redundancy in the system to monitor that and correct for it. The key point, though, is that DAC functions today are integrated in the
microcontroller (processor) chips, e.g. used in the BMS and other vehicle ECUs. Furthermore, the supply voltages of processor chips are
very tightly regulated. Given the CAN bus system of present day vehicles, various ECUs can cross reference battery supply voltages,
e.g. VCM versus the BMS voltages as the ECUs communicate.

Most likely the BMS of the 30 kWh Leafs had the same firmware as the earlier Leafs, with just modifications to key parameters
for future battery upgrades being stored in flash RAM and easily updated via Nissan's Consult diagnostic tool. So it's highly doubtful
that only the 30 kWh Leaf's BMS had a firmware design problem that required an update. It's more likely an issue with the 30 kWh
battery and not an initial firmware design error nor an electronics problem. It would have been easy for Nissan to update the BMS
firmware to test for certain battery conditions/parameters that may only occur to some of the 30 kWh vehicles, and then only tweak
the necessary BMS parameters. If those vehicles never entered the modes tested for, the BMS firmware tweak (patch) wouldn't run.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 9:35 pm
by Oils4AsphaultOnly
sister-in-law's 2016 leaf SV just lost its 3rd bar. 50k+ miles on the odo. Spent the first 35k miles with a previous owner in Santa Clarita, was down 4 bars at the time of purchase last year. It got the BMS update right away, which restored 2-bars. I expect it to lose its fourth bar by the end of this year as summer hasn't even started yet.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 9:50 pm
by LeftieBiker
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:sister-in-law's 2016 leaf SV just lost its 3rd bar. 50k+ miles on the odo. Spent the first 35k miles with a previous owner in Santa Clarita, was down 4 bars at the time of purchase last year. It got the BMS update right away, which restored 2-bars. I expect it to lose its fourth bar by the end of this year as summer hasn't even started yet.
Yikes. Where does she live, and do you know the build date?

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 10:48 pm
by cwerdna
^^^
Good news is that they'll receive a replacement battery, and maybe even another one, if they're lucky.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 10:57 pm
by LeftieBiker
cwerdna wrote:^^^
Good news is that they'll receive a replacement battery, and maybe even another one, if they're lucky.
It will be better news if they get a 2017 pack, and it lasts out the warranty with no more than one bar loss. We still don't know if the early 2016 30kwh packs just have a high rate for cell defects, or if they also have worse longevity.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:27 pm
by Oils4AsphaultOnly
LeftieBiker wrote:
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:sister-in-law's 2016 leaf SV just lost its 3rd bar. 50k+ miles on the odo. Spent the first 35k miles with a previous owner in Santa Clarita, was down 4 bars at the time of purchase last year. It got the BMS update right away, which restored 2-bars. I expect it to lose its fourth bar by the end of this year as summer hasn't even started yet.
Yikes. Where does she live, and do you know the build date?
She lives 2 blocks from me. Will need to confirm the build date later.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Wed May 29, 2019 11:30 pm
by Oils4AsphaultOnly
cwerdna wrote:^^^
Good news is that they'll receive a replacement battery, and maybe even another one, if they're lucky.
With my 2016 Leaf S as reference (35k miles and still with 12 bars), I doubt she'll make it to a third battery. I think the previous owner must've abused it (left it fully charged and parked under the sun or something like that).

But yes, getting a replacement battery towards the end of the warranty period is pretty good news.

Re: 2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2019 8:11 pm
by Oils4AsphaultOnly
LeftieBiker wrote:
cwerdna wrote:^^^
Good news is that they'll receive a replacement battery, and maybe even another one, if they're lucky.
It will be better news if they get a 2017 pack, and it lasts out the warranty with no more than one bar loss. We still don't know if the early 2016 30kwh packs just have a high rate for cell defects, or if they also have worse longevity.
Build date of November 2015, so that would explain the rapid degradation.