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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 1:49 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:He's talking about multiple quick charges, combined with aggressive driving to pull power from the pack rapidly. One driver claims to have substantially improved his SOH by doing this.
Can someone point me to the exact details of the protocol - I'd consider trying it.
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)

TheLostPetrol
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:19 am
Delivery Date: 23 Jan 2020
Leaf Number: 300683
Location: Greater Chicagoland

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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:06 pm

Edit: deleted
Last edited by TheLostPetrol on Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2020-01-23 Used 2018 LEAF SV Mfd 2018-xx In-serv 2018-04-28
Date mi AHr SOH Hx QC L1/L2
2020-01-24 48,898 103.73 89.8 96.1 29 792

TheLostPetrol
Posts: 101
Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2017 8:19 am
Delivery Date: 23 Jan 2020
Leaf Number: 300683
Location: Greater Chicagoland

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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:11 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:He's talking about multiple quick charges, combined with aggressive driving to pull power from the pack rapidly. One driver claims to have substantially improved his SOH by doing this.
While this tactic reportedly increases the SOH (and AHr) reported by the BMS, I haven't seen any post claim that it increases range. AFAIK, only one poster (a man from Sweden, right?) measured range (i.e. change in SOC for a standard trip) in two LEAFs. He found the aggressively driven one's SOH was 10% too high and the timidly driven one's SOH was 10% too low.
2020-01-23 Used 2018 LEAF SV Mfd 2018-xx In-serv 2018-04-28
Date mi AHr SOH Hx QC L1/L2
2020-01-24 48,898 103.73 89.8 96.1 29 792

LeftieBiker
Moderator
Posts: 14626
Joined: Wed May 22, 2013 3:17 am
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2018
Location: Upstate New York, US

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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 3:44 pm

I'm not sure where the info is either. I don't dismiss it, but do take it with a grain of salt.
Scarlet Ember 2018 Leaf SL W/ Pro Pilot
2009 Vectrix VX-1 W/18 Leaf modules, & 3 EZIP E-bicycles.
BAFX OBDII Dongle
PLEASE don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

arnis
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:21 pm
Delivery Date: 23 Jul 2014
Leaf Number: 015896
Location: Estonia, Europe

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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:01 pm

SageBrush wrote:
What is "rapid" degradation ?
Anything that ends up with warranty replacement is faster than rapid.
It's defective (defective batteries can either die unexpectedly or degrade rapidly).
Except if not used according to requirements (Leaf manual does state cold limit, but not specific hot limit,
therefore, wherever vehicle is sold, any regular temperature upper end in that area is considered acceptable).

Rapid degradation should be one that ends up with less than 80% of capacity in short period of 5 years (normal mileage).
It's very common in many areas to use 20:80 ratio, incl batteries. Nissan's 4th bar is their vague BS warranty limit.
Batteries, that keep at least 80% for 5 years, can be counted in "expected degradation" box. For now.
Batteries, that keep at least 80% for vehicle lifetime (minimum 10, maximum 20 years according to 2013 vehicle lifetime statistics, though no less than 160 000km) can be called lifetime batteries.

As of right now. Most Tesla's appear to have lifetime battery. Leafs have either defective, rapidly degrading or normally degrading batteries.
After Lizard upgrade there was some improvement, but far from normal in terms of worldwide sales.
80% limit is not the end. It's just industry accepted benchmark. To simplify, above that and battery is "used". Below that and battery is degraded (any preposition like: slightly, somewhat, moderately, heavily etc suits here too).

EDIT: warranty is usually about expected range not capacity. Some manufacturers use buffer zones.
It's possible to lose 30% of capacity but only 10% of range compared to new vehicle.
PS: Lifetimes and mileages are suitable for private passenger vehicles. Not commercial, heavy, taxi etc.

Legislators have not yet fully understood pollution of EVs. For example, ICE vehicles can't go worse than their pollution tier/class.
If it does, it doesn't pass MOT (in theory, corruption doesn't count here, either local, or something bigger, VW for example)
If EV can't regen nominally (Leaf khmkhm) it means vehicle efficiency is below expected (friction brakes used, more energy consumed etc). There are no rules. Yet. Vehicle production has a carbon footprint. Replacing batteries again and again makes it bigger. Manufacturers
might be tempted to use cheaper stuff in the name of profits and sacrificing real footprint compared to what's on the paper.
Therefore, in not so far future, when EVs/hybrids are the majority of new vehicles sold, things will be stricter.
PS: There are already hybrids (Civic, Prius) that have failed batteries "fixed". Honda did some "software" tweak that deleted the check-light on the dash so vehicle could pass MOT and warranty terms. But vehicle's fuel efficiency (emission tiers) due to dead battery were wrong. No problems. Yet.
It's just a matter of time. Due to lots of PHEV's coming in near future, I believe the snowball will start rolling from there.
First thousands of complaints from owners who can't get their promised electric range (crucial 80% from promised 20-50km) out of their short electric range PHEV vehicles within warranty period (5-years, 100 000km).
Chevy Volt has all that sorted out. It has massive upper-lower SOC limiters, that, AFAIK, expand during battery degradation to counteract lost range. Excellent example that all that can be sorted out reasonably. Otherwise, manufacturers will be tempted to do what smartphone industry does. My Samsung has charging limit set to 4.4V Excellent data on paper. Lost 30% of capacity within first year. And 20% more during second year. Cars have minimum lifetime of 160 000km or 8 years. Absolute minimum! ICEV, HEV, PHEV, RExEV, EV, whatever. Smartphones have minimum lifetime of 2 years. Even though things are mad in phone and HEV zone I believe it will not continue with real stuff (actual/meaningful EV range).

I'm pretty serious about that - hope it inspires some important people that might not have been informed yet :ugeek:

He's talking about multiple quick charges, combined with aggressive driving to pull power from the pack rapidly. One driver claims to have substantially improved his SOH by doing this.
Yes. I've also done that also many times. Rapid power flow triggers that often. Either long QC charge with warm battery or full speed driving for few minutes (literally, max speed). It's temporary, a week/month. Actual capacity doesn't change. GOM maximum range will. It doesn't matter. Except when you try to sell your vehicle.



Here is another one: If keeping SOC below 80% wouldn't have any benefits at all, Tesla's would not have a slider capable going down to 50%.
Short range EVs <30kWh -- Medium range: 30-60kWh -- Long range: >60kWh
Charging: Trickle <3kW -- Normal 3-22kW -- Fast 50-100kW -- Supercharging >100kW

lorenfb
Posts: 2385
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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 4:58 pm

arnis wrote: Here is another one: If keeping SOC below 80% wouldn't have any benefits at all, Tesla's would not have a slider capable going down to 50%.
Then again, some battery chemistries might be more sensitive, i.e. increasing the likelihood of degradation, to being charged to higher
SOCs than less volatile battery chemistries, right?
#1 Leaf SL MY 9/13: 76K miles, 47 Ahrs, 5.0 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=78, 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

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14687
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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:36 pm

sflores91 wrote:I didn't do any leaf spy on my Nissan leaf 2016 with the 30 kwh battery. I purchased it brand in Las Vegas 02-16. I just dropped my 4th bar and received a replacement from the dealership on Tuesday 11-17. The car had about 26605 miles on it.

I love having a new pack it really makes the car feel new again. It was also nice seeing the guessometer read 126 miles instead of 55-70 depending on how fast I drove it home. With the capacity that low I regularly got about 70-80 miles a charge depending on how much free way driving I did. Surprisingly, the last charge I had on the old battery got me about 93 miles before recharging at 8%. Mind you I wasnt going all the way home. I was driving to work from a friend's house, about 10 miles surface streets.

That being said I would Level 2 charge it every night. I also do Level 3 charge when stuff would come up unexpectedly and I could make it home to charge. If I had to guess more than 10 but less than 20. Most days I works charge to 100% and drive it down to about 35-25 percent before charging. As the degradation got worse, this number would get lower. Towards the end was running the battery down to 15 to less than 5% regularly.

For the first year I bought the car I was traveling 70 miles round trip a day through a hilly route to work. This driving dropped the capacity 2 bars. Then I got a new job that only had me driving about 40 miles a day. I somehow still managed to drop the other two bars. My hope is that the warranty on the battery allows me to replace the battery at least two more times. Soon, I am going to be moving closer to work which will be about 10 miles a day. So we'll see if the car gets driven that hard.

The leaf had been a really cool car. So much so that I forgot how much gas even costs and it feels weird to pump it when I rent cars for work. Recently, I've been thinking about picking up Prius to be able to visit friends or of town, but that won't happen for at least a year or so.
YOU are the most important post in this entire thread!!!
too bad it wasn't June though. Probably gonna have to wait 5-6 months to find out if your replacement is any better. You MUST KEEP US UPDATED on your packs health...
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; 7059.6 mi, 95.35% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14687
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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:38 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:He's talking about multiple quick charges, combined with aggressive driving to pull power from the pack rapidly. One driver claims to have substantially improved his SOH by doing this.
multiple fast charges yes, but aggressive driving isn't really necessary. I will say that I am a law breaker regularly now that I have 30 kwh but pack manipulation was just as effective on 24 kwh packs when I made it a habit of never exceeding 62 mph.

Another thing that seems plausible is BMS simply losing track of the Health and several relatively deep discharges to at least 25-30% and complete recharges seems to bring numbers up on level 2. Its almost like a reset of sorts. This process takes longer but usually see results in no more than 4 days or so
Last edited by DaveinOlyWA on Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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; 7059.6 mi, 95.35% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SageBrush
Posts: 4907
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: NM

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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:40 pm

lorenfb wrote:
arnis wrote: Here is another one: If keeping SOC below 80% wouldn't have any benefits at all, Tesla's would not have a slider capable going down to 50%.
Then again, some battery chemistries might be more sensitive, i.e. increasing the likelihood of degradation, to being charged to higher
SOCs than less volatile battery chemistries, right?
I think you are misinterpreting the reason the Tesla slider exists down to 50%. It is there to aid trip planning during Supercharger hopping.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Two years in Colorado, now in NM
03/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
11/2018: 56.16 Ahr, 30k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14687
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

Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:42 pm

SageBrush wrote:
lorenfb wrote:
arnis wrote: Here is another one: If keeping SOC below 80% wouldn't have any benefits at all, Tesla's would not have a slider capable going down to 50%.
Then again, some battery chemistries might be more sensitive, i.e. increasing the likelihood of degradation, to being charged to higher
SOCs than less volatile battery chemistries, right?
I think you are misinterpreting the reason the Tesla slider exists down to 50%. It is there to aid trip planning during Supercharger hopping.
What is the logic of a 50% recharge for trip planning?
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; 7059.6 mi, 95.35% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Return to “Problems / Troubleshooting”