DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14806
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:50 am

SageBrush wrote:
arnis wrote:
SageBrush wrote: I'm not sure I understand this comment, but I agree with the rest of your post.

We let the car battery drop to 30-40% SOC from use before we charge it back up to 80%. Charging is set to start at 5am and performed outside in the summer. This is the coolest time of day and about an hour or two before use. I thought about asking my wife to recharge when the SoC hits the 20-30% level but that provokes range anxiety.
You charge up to 80% but do you discharge it within few hours down to 50%? If not, consider not charging up to 80%.
Start charging at 7am so that SOC is below 80% when trip starts. So it is near 50% mark soon after.
The charge is set to finish at 6am, and the car is used between 6am and 9am. The end of charging battery temperature is 6 bars in the summer and 3-4 bars in the winter. Each trip knocks about 10% off the SoC

I call that babying the battery, but it could always be a bit better.
you would be a perfect "80%" candidate. I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 10,081 mi, 95.03% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lorenfb
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 9:43 am

DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
1. There's no comprehensive analysis that indicates that charging to 90% versus 100% reduces degradation long term, i.e. it's basically
anecdotal at this point. Besides, once the charge level reaches 90% and beyond, the charging current is at a point where minimal battery
heating occurs.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.

Have to love how anecdotal info, pulled from you know where, now becomes valid battery theory!
#1 Leaf SL MY 9/13: 76K miles, 47 Ahrs, 5.0 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=73, L2 - 100% > 1000, temp < 95F, (DOD) > 20 Ahrs
#2 Leaf SL MY 12/18: 10.3K miles, SOH 109Ahrs/115Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), DOD > 20%, temp < 105F

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:24 am

lorenfb wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
1. There's no comprehensive analysis that indicates that charging to 90% versus 100% reduces degradation long term, i.e. it's basically
anecdotal at this point. Besides, once the charge level reaches 90% and beyond, the charging current is at a point where minimal battery
heating occurs.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.

Have to love how anecdotal info, pulled from you know where, now becomes valid battery theory!
I second DaveinOlyWA's request for an 90% or even an 80% charge limit. That would mean that when I get to work, my car is parked with a 60-70% SOC, instead of 80%+. I run all my errands AFTER work, so I end the day at 30-40% SOC now. Too much for long term parking, but not enough to skip a single overnight charge. So the issue for me, and I'd imagine others as well, isn't what SOC we leave the home at, but rather the SOC that we're parked at work (sometimes under the sun) at. Since that SOC is dependent on what SOC we leave home with, it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation,

Edit: Those who need the 100%, can charge to 100%. I just wanted Nissan to give those of us mid-way folks the chance to limit the charge to only 80% like their 2013 leaf's did.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

BuckMkII
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 8:04 am
Location: Seattle

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:52 am

lorenfb wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!
.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.
It could have a calculator function that shows how long you need to charge (at the full rate of your OBC, or at the known volts/amps of your EVSE) from the current SOC to a target SOC, then you could at least set a timer for when you need to run to the car and pull the plug, or when to plug in if you are aiming for a certain departure time. I've been pretty successful lately doing that calculation in my head, targeting 16 to 17 kWh and assuming 7 kW charging to allow a few extra minutes for me to leave my lab and walk to the parking garage, but having it at a glance wouldn't be a bad thing.

If I was asking for a change to LeafSpy, it would be to include the battery temp in the Trip Log screen. How hard is that?
2013 SV no QC, built July 2013
car grew up in San Jose CA, purchased 5/31/17 in Seattle
on 6/16/17: AHr = 56.4; SOH = 86%; Hx = 84.3; ODO = 39,250
bar 12 lost 8/21/17
on 12/25/18: AHr = 55.5; SOH = 84.9 %; Hx = 80.3; ODO = 53,018

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14806
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:59 am

lorenfb wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
1. There's no comprehensive analysis that indicates that charging to 90% versus 100% reduces degradation long term, i.e. it's basically
anecdotal at this point. Besides, once the charge level reaches 90% and beyond, the charging current is at a point where minimal battery
heating occurs.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.

Have to love how anecdotal info, pulled from you know where, now becomes valid battery theory!
So you don't agree that higher SOC and heat increases degradation?

Because if you did, your comment above makes no sense. Its not good to charge to full but 90% makes no difference? Would it not imply that the lower the SOC in heat, the better?
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 10,081 mi, 95.03% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lorenfb
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:02 am

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote: Since that SOC is dependent on what SOC we leave home with, it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation,
Where has this, i.e. "it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation", been determined with certainty using a form of scientific
methodology in a longitudinal analysis?
#1 Leaf SL MY 9/13: 76K miles, 47 Ahrs, 5.0 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=73, L2 - 100% > 1000, temp < 95F, (DOD) > 20 Ahrs
#2 Leaf SL MY 12/18: 10.3K miles, SOH 109Ahrs/115Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), DOD > 20%, temp < 105F

lorenfb
Posts: 2426
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:03 am

DaveinOlyWA wrote:
lorenfb wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
1. There's no comprehensive analysis that indicates that charging to 90% versus 100% reduces degradation long term, i.e. it's basically
anecdotal at this point. Besides, once the charge level reaches 90% and beyond, the charging current is at a point where minimal battery
heating occurs.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.

Have to love how anecdotal info, pulled from you know where, now becomes valid battery theory!
So you don't agree that higher SOC and heat increases degradation?

Because if you did, your comment above makes no sense. Its not good to charge to full but 90% makes no difference? Would it not imply that the lower the SOC in heat, the better?
Your data, please! And if so, you haven't stated nor provided proof as to the degree to which it has an effect.
#1 Leaf SL MY 9/13: 76K miles, 47 Ahrs, 5.0 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=73, L2 - 100% > 1000, temp < 95F, (DOD) > 20 Ahrs
#2 Leaf SL MY 12/18: 10.3K miles, SOH 109Ahrs/115Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), DOD > 20%, temp < 105F

ironmanco
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 8:26 pm
Delivery Date: 25 Jan 2016
Location: Boulder, CO

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:19 am

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
I second DaveinOlyWA's request for an 90% or even an 80% charge limit. That would mean that when I get to work, my car is parked with a 60-70% SOC, instead of 80%+. I run all my errands AFTER work, so I end the day at 30-40% SOC now. Too much for long term parking, but not enough to skip a single overnight charge. So the issue for me, and I'd imagine others as well, isn't what SOC we leave the home at, but rather the SOC that we're parked at work (sometimes under the sun) at. Since that SOC is dependent on what SOC we leave home with, it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation,

Edit: Those who need the 100%, can charge to 100%. I just wanted Nissan to give those of us mid-way folks the chance to limit the charge to only 80% like their 2013 leaf's did.
This is where smart chargers/EVSEs (Open EVSE, Juiceplug, etc) come in. Set'em and forget 'em.
2016 Nissan Leaf SL Deep Blue Pearl
Mfg 12/15 Del 1/16 30 Oct 2018 50,183 mi Ahr 66.89 SOH 84% Hx 63.55% (w/Nissan sw patch)
Charging: evseupgrade L2 charging 30A circuit @ 24A shared garage heater circuit (ask me)

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14806
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:30 am

Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote:
lorenfb wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
I think we need to lobby Jim to add custom charge levels to LEAF Spy!

With 24 and 30 kwh packs, there is not enough range to not charge to full but with 40 kwh, I would be ok with a standard 90% charge. Doing just this is supposed to reduce degradation several fold in warm weather.
1. There's no comprehensive analysis that indicates that charging to 90% versus 100% reduces degradation long term, i.e. it's basically
anecdotal at this point. Besides, once the charge level reaches 90% and beyond, the charging current is at a point where minimal battery
heating occurs.
2. LeafSpy is a data gathering tool facilitating Leaf data analysis. It's doubtful whether it can modified to alter how the BMS controls charging.

Have to love how anecdotal info, pulled from you know where, now becomes valid battery theory!
I second DaveinOlyWA's request for an 90% or even an 80% charge limit. That would mean that when I get to work, my car is parked with a 60-70% SOC, instead of 80%+. I run all my errands AFTER work, so I end the day at 30-40% SOC now. Too much for long term parking, but not enough to skip a single overnight charge. So the issue for me, and I'd imagine others as well, isn't what SOC we leave the home at, but rather the SOC that we're parked at work (sometimes under the sun) at. Since that SOC is dependent on what SOC we leave home with, it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation,

Edit: Those who need the 100%, can charge to 100%. I just wanted Nissan to give those of us mid-way folks the chance to limit the charge to only 80% like their 2013 leaf's did.
This is for you since you are already onboard with the concept.
The cathode (positive electrode) develops a similar restrictive layer known as electrolyte oxidation. Dr. Dahn stresses that a voltage above 4.10V/cell at elevated temperature causes this, a demise that can be more harmful than cycling a battery. The longer the battery stays in a high voltage, the faster the degradation occurs.
Notice a few keywords. These will be familiar if you scroll up about a million pages to my original comments

Elevated Temperature
The longer it stays the faster degradation occurs

So again....

High Heat or High SOC does cause degradation but charging to a high level and immediately driving is ok in a relative sense

but the real battery killer is Heat, High SOC AND TIME
and the real takeaway is the statement says "elevated" heat and that my folks aint hardly very warm to most of us.
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 10,081 mi, 95.03% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oils4AsphaultOnly
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2015 4:09 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 313890
Location: Arcadia, CA

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

Thu Nov 09, 2017 2:18 pm

lorenfb wrote:
Oils4AsphaultOnly wrote: Since that SOC is dependent on what SOC we leave home with, it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation,
Where has this, i.e. "it matters VERY MUCH to the long term degradation", been determined with certainty using a form of scientific
methodology in a longitudinal analysis?
I'm just pointing out the practical fallacy of the premise. Would you agree that parking the car at 80% SOC is worse than parking it at 60% SOC? If we can agree on that, then it's trivial to see what SOC you have to start your day with to get to either of those situations.
:: Model 3 LR :: acquired 9 May '18
:: Leaf S30 :: build date: Sep '16 :: purchased: Nov '16
100% Zero transportation emissions (except when I walk) and loving it!

Return to “Problems / Troubleshooting”