My 2016 30KWh experiencee

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Roddzilla

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
5
Location
was Atlanta now Denver
Never thought my 2012 SL would end up having a better battery than my current 2016. It wasn’t always like this.

I had a very fun 2012 v8 Audi S5 when I decided to pull the trigger on a 24 month lease on a 2012 Leaf. That Leaf was the perfect commuting vehicle and the lease payment and electricity cost me less per month than simply putting premium gas in the S5. I sold the Audi and never looked back.

I ended up extending that lease for an additional year and put right at 43,xxx miles on that thing. Mainly commuting to work and evening/weekend errands. Life was good, but at the 30th month, I lost a bar and then another about 4 months later. I had lost 2 bars and was reading on here about the new chemistry and 30KWh capacity in the new ones. I decided to to turn the 2012 back into Nissan at month 36.

Fast forward and I finally find a good 36 month 15k mile per year lease on a 2016 SL with the new, big battery!

First year of driving the 2016 (same exact commute and charging pattern as the 2012) and I was getting between 100 and 123 miles of real range. I was very happy!

Then, toward the end of the second year, I lost a capacity bar. Then a month later, another bar disappeared. The third bar disappeared just weeks after the 2nd bar. I’m three capacity bars down and it’s time for the 24 month battery check at the dealer. Ironically, my report says the battery is in great condition despite my range complaints and 3 bars being gone.

I left the dealership and decided to buy an OBD Bluetooth dongle and Leaf Spy. Initial scans show SOH is in the low 70s and Hx is in the 60s.

I write an email to Nissan North America complaining about the battery... I get no response.

I decided to take a new job and make the move from Atlanta to Denver — the Leaf was shipped and arrived perfect (except the 3 lost capacity bars!). You know what else arrived? An email from Nissan telling me there was a software update that would calculate my battery capacity properly. Seriously?

I had the update done Friday and now I am super sceptical. Am I wrong for thinking this is an update that simply prevents these cars from losing their 4th bar (and thus prevents Nissan from replacing the battery under warranty)?

LeafSpy before the update:

AHr = 51.27
SOH = 64.51
Hx = 58.34
ODO = 35,813
3 capacity bars gone

After update:

AHr = 65.30
SOH = 82.16
Hx = 58.34
ODO = 35,815
1 capacity bar gone (2 were recovered by the update!)

No charging after the update and the 2 miles added to the odometer was the dealership moving the car around during the service (also had them do the tsb for axle clunking). Not sure if range is better as I haven’t charged or driven it much this weekend.


Is this software update legit, or is it kicking warranty claims down the road for a Nissan?

Thanks for reading, I know this message is long but I am super curious what others think??

DR
 
Forgot to mention...

I showed the service writer my LeafSpy screen showing SOH and Hx before the update so he could see how crappy the battery was.

He asks me, “where did you get this information?” I tell him from an app that reads the ODB port.

He then says,”The technicians don’t like it when people use apps to get this information”

DR
 
dwl said:
Many pages in another thread with the same question asked here: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=532028#p532028. The capacity the battery can hold hasn't changed but it should provide more usable range by recalibrating the low warnings to supposedly a more accurate level.

"supposedly a more accurate level"
Sure! And "found" a missing 14 Ahrs, right? But Hx remained unchanged? New battery physics from Nissan?
 
OP: most of us are skeptical of the update, but that is neither here or there.
If you want to know your battery capacity, drive it down to the VLB warning and then charge to full at a station that tells you how many kWh were delivered. Figure about 12.5% +/- 1% charging losses from the meter to the battery.

My home EVSE does not have this option so I use a public ChargePoint.
Second, while it does not really affect you as a lease, knowing the lowest cell voltage at VLB after the update is of interest to people who own the car since it may affect battery aging.
Third, it may be that the LEAF requires a few weeks (months ?) to recalibrate until the LeafSpy readings are accurate.
 
lorenfb said:
Sure! And "found" a missing 14 Ahrs, right? But Hx remained unchanged? New battery physics from Nissan?
I think we agree that pushing cells much below 3.30V is going to accelerate their aging, and in any case no where near 14 Ah exists in the pack between 3.30V and turtle.
 
lorenfb said:
dwl said:
Many pages in another thread with the same question asked here: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=532028#p532028. The capacity the battery can hold hasn't changed but it should provide more usable range by recalibrating the low warnings to supposedly a more accurate level.
"supposedly a more accurate level"
Sure! And "found" a missing 14 Ahrs, right? But Hx remained unchanged? New battery physics from Nissan?
But what is Hx measuring? I spend several hours last night reviewing the threads on Hx as I was hoping it was another useful measure of health and the conclusion remains that the exact meaning is not known. While SoH can be tied to a field called LBSOH the H field seems to have always been a mystery.

Based on the recharge event method (kWh in from flat) cars could be shown to have more capacity than indicated by the Ah (and hence SoH) reporting. There were definitely calculation errors but only time will tell how well they have been fixed.
 
dwl said:
lorenfb said:
dwl said:
Many pages in another thread with the same question asked here: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=532028#p532028. The capacity the battery can hold hasn't changed but it should provide more usable range by recalibrating the low warnings to supposedly a more accurate level.
"supposedly a more accurate level"
Sure! And "found" a missing 14 Ahrs, right? But Hx remained unchanged? New battery physics from Nissan?
But what is Hx measuring? I spend several hours last night reviewing the threads on Hx as I was hoping it was another useful measure of health and the conclusion remains that the exact meaning is not known. While SoH can be tied to a field called LBSOH the H field seems to have always been a mystery.

Based on the recharge event method (kWh in from flat) cars could be shown to have more capacity than indicated by the Ah (and hence SoH) reporting. There were definitely calculation errors but only time will tell how well they have been fixed.

Hx is the ratio (in percent) of the present battery conductance in mhos to the original battery conductance when the battery was new.
The conductance of a battery is the inverse of the internal resistance of a battery in ohms or milliohms. The typical the Leaf and the Tesla
MS have about the same internal resistance of about 57 milliohms at about ambient. The internal battery resistance has a negative
temperature coefficient, i.e. the resistance decreases with temperature. Both the present Ahrs and internal resistance of any battery
are key parameters that reflect the state of health of any battery. As the battery ages, the available Ahrs decreases as does its conductance,
i.e. the inverse of the internal resistance which increases. So both the Leaf's SOH and Hx should track each other as the battery degrades.
If one changes significantly and the other doesn't, one needs to question how SOH and/or Hx may have been modified, and why one
remains unchanged while the other has not.

Here're battery data from my Leaf:

11/20/14 -13,700 miles, 76 mohms per LeafDD, 20 Deg, 73% SOC
11/27 -13,800 miles, 67 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 63% SOC
11/30 - 13,900 miles, 56 mohms per LeafDD, 27 deg, 71% SOC
12/2 - 14.100 miles, 55 mohms per LeafDD, 28 deg, 67% SOC
12/16 - 14,500 miles, 89 mohms per LeafDD, 15 deg, 93% SOC
12/27/14 - 14,800 miles, 103 mohms per LeafDD, 11 deg, 24% SOC
3/10 - 17,400 miles, 60 mohms per LeafDD, 30 deg, 73% SOC
3/14 - 17, 550 miles, 56 mohms per LeafDD, 32 deg, 47% SOC
4/14 - 19,100 miles, 59 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg. 38% SOC
5/4 - 19,989 miles, 64 mohms per LeafDD, 24 deg. 48% SOC
5/15 - 20,400 miles, 73 mohms per LeafDD, 20 deg. 41% SOC
5/22 - 20,700 miles, 58 mohms per LeafDD, 28 deg. 50% SOC
12/10/15 - 28,000 miles, 90 mohms per LeafDD, 19 deg. 92% SOC
4/5 - 32,000 miles, 74 mohms per LeafDD, 24 deg, 55% SOC
5/16 - 33,700 miles,89 mohms per LeafDD, 22 deg, 47% SOC
5/16 - 33.700 miles, 58 mohms per LeafDD, 31 deg, 76% SOC
10/5 - 39,300 miles, 100 mohms per LeafDD, 22 deg, 50% SOC
10/6 - 39,400 miles, 61 mohms per LeafDD, 30 deg, 51% SOC
10/7 - 39,500 miles, 80 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 56% SOC
10/15 - 40,000 miles, 71 mohms per LeafDD, 27 deg, 45% SOC
10/30 - 41,000 miles, 74 mohms per LeafDD, 23 deg, 66% SOC
12/26/16 - 43,000 miles, 110 mohms per LeafDD, 13 deg, 77% SOC
6/10/17 - 49,600 miles, 89 mohms per LeafDD, 19 deg, 70% SOC
4/2/18 - 62,000 miles, 110 mohms per LeafDD, 18 deg, 94% SOC
6/13/18 - 65,000 miles, 84 mohms per LeafDD, 26 deg, 52% SOC
 
lorenfb said:
Hx is the ratio (in percent) of the present battery conductance in mhos to the original battery conductance when the battery was new.
References please. I agree this is the common perception but I can't find any evidence that ties Hx (or Health as it used to be called) to conductance. As a battery degrades the Ah capacity reduces and conductance in ohms rises. Is there any evidence that Hx is actually measuring conductance?
 
dwl said:
As a battery degrades the Ah capacity reduces and conductance in ohms rises.

No!

Please re-read what was posted. Conductance is the inverse of resistance and is measured is mhos and NOT in ohms!
Many have thought over the years that Hx was the internal resistance of the battery in ohms/milliohms. After analyzing
how it changes over time, i.e. it decreases, it's obviously NOT simply the internal resistance or conductance of the battery.
Furthermore, since its value doesn't change as the battery temperature changes, it's not some absolute value. And since
its value takes the form of a ratio/percentage like SOH, one can most likely conclude that it's the ratio of the present battery
conductance to the original battery conductance providing a similar battery health measurement as does SOH. Yes, you're
correct in that until recently, it hadn't been clearly defined on the MNL forum. If you have knowledge otherwise, then
present it.

Please review my battery data. The battery resistance increases as the battery degrades. So that implies that the battery
conductance decreases. Don't confuse the two.

Additional info here; http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=13247&start=130
 
We don't have leaf spy. We had little degradation on our battery before the update based on our very predictable repeating driving patterns. Hard to put it in percentages but maybe 12 to 16 KM depending on the time of year. Since the update we seem to have it all back although its hard to put a number on it. Because of our driving patterns and speeds the GOM is very accurate to what we actually get. When we got the car 200 KM was easily achievable for real world range under our driving conditions and speeds. It dropped off to the mid 180s over the last couple years. Now its back over or around 200km. We also get more regeneration bubbles when the battery is at 95 percent (3 or 4) compared to 90 percent before we got 4 regen bubbles before the update. For us we think the update made a difference.

I have no loyalty to any brand but credit where credit is due, our Nissan leaf has been flawless since we bought it and is simply the best car we have ever owned. Literally nothing has gone wrong and other than our 30 dollar per month auto car wash subscription it hasn't cost us a dime. Well that and a jug of washer fluid.
 
webeleafowners said:
I have no loyalty to any brand but credit where credit is due, our Nissan leaf has been flawless since we bought it and is simply the best car we have ever owned. Literally nothing has gone wrong and other than our 30 dollar per month auto car wash subscription it hasn't cost us a dime. Well that and a jug of washer fluid

Notwithstanding the Leaf's battery, most MNL forum members would agree.
 
lorenfb said:
dwl said:
As a battery degrades the Ah capacity reduces and conductance in ohms rises.
No!

Please re-read what was posted. Conductance is the inverse of resistance and is measured is mhos and NOT in ohms!
Sorry, bit tired and was posting in a hurry, and meant to say resistance in ohms rises. It was confusing me when your data was reported as mohms - too many letters :?

If I take some sample data from your Leaf:
11/20/14 -13,700 miles, 76 mohms per LeafDD, 20 Deg, 73% SOC
11/27 -13,800 miles, 67 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 63% SOC
4/2/18 - 62,000 miles, 110 mohms per LeafDD, 18 deg, 94% SOC
6/13/18 - 65,000 miles, 84 mohms per LeafDD, 26 deg, 52% SOC
This suggests the resistance has risen from around 0.07 ohms to about 0.1 ohms over 3.5 years.

If I look at the discharge data (which I would assume is easier to measure during use by the BMS) from https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/fsev/batteryLeaf9270.pdf over 2.5 years and under 24,000 miles it rises from about 0.11 ohms to 0.15 ohms. Higher than your readings but measurement methods will be different. A LeafDD report from these ANL Leafs would have been valuable.

So LeafDD reports as a resistance but Leaf Spy Hx is a percentage, reducing as resistance increases, of some arbitrary starting value?

This early post has me confused whether the reported 16 bit number is rising or falling as the battery ages: "Another 16 bit number also seemed to track capacity but was in the (initially observed) range of 7000 to 10200.. Taken as a percentage with two digits of precision I decided to call this "health" for lack of a better term. On the old software and especially for cars with only moderate capacity loss (still 12 bars) it seemed to track the Ah Capacity fairly close. Now that health is reported on LeafDD and the ELM battery app we've been able to track it over a much larger number of cars and seen some strange stuff.. like REALLY low numbers for cars with more capacity loss.. or 105-111% for some 2013 packs with Ah Capacity pegged at 67.3620Ah. What does it all mean? I don't know" - from http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=319129#p319129 Is this the same parameter?
 
Using my LeafDD data from the other thread:

11/14 @ 14K miles, 20 deg, resistance = .076, 63 Ahrs
6/18 @ 65K miles, 18 deg, resistance = .110, 50 Ahrs

Rr - resistance ratio (now / new) = .110 / .076 = 1.44 (144% - an increase)
Cr - conductance ratio (now / new - Hx) = 1 / Rr = .076 / .110 = .69 (69% - a decrease), my actual Hx now reads 70% (see below)

SOH = Ahrs (now) / Ahrs (new) = 50 / 63 = 79 %

Although SOH has decreased to a lesser extent than Hx, both track one another as the battery degrades.
 
I now realise that the H parameter from LeafDD or Hx from Leaf Spy is a measurement from the BMS, which doesn't change with the update, while the resistance measurement seems to be computed in LeafDD:

"For software version 1.1.4 or newer (units shipped in July 2013) if you see two dots vertically near the bottom center of the main page that indicates an impedance test was done and results are waiting on page 2 (described below). The last line on Page 2 will be temporarily replaced with an impedance reading (mohms) as well as the pack SOC and temperature at the time of the test. This is basically an indication of how much the voltage sags under load (or rises on a DCQC or regen) and thus how much power you have. The Leaf battery has very low impedance with plenty of margin so this not so important as perhaps interesting. A new Leaf might be 50-60mohms whereas a degraded vehicle could be 2x that or more". http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=12561

From the same page "H is a number in the group 1 data which looks like a Health % number but I'm not really sure. Expect about 100% on a new car. (I did see 111 on a new 2013 with 67.4Ah capacity, but under most other cases it seems to scale to the Ah capacity on most other cars)".
 
dwl said:
I now realise that the H parameter from LeafDD or Hx from Leaf Spy is a measurement from the BMS, which doesn't change with the update,

And the reason is? You do acknowledge now that Hx (mine @ 70% per LeafDD) is also an indication of battery degradation
as is SOH (mine @ 78% per LeafSpy), right?
 
lorenfb said:
dwl said:
I now realise that the H parameter from LeafDD or Hx from Leaf Spy is a measurement from the BMS, which doesn't change with the update,
And the reason is? You do acknowledge now that Hx (mine @ 70% per LeafDD) is also an indication of battery degradation as is SOH (mine @ 78% per LeafSpy), right?
The H measurement is mentioned separately in the LeafDD documentation. I read those notes as saying mohms is a calculation by LeafDD while H is extracted from the BMS. Sorry I don’t have LeafDD.

Your data is very interesting. Your mohms data bounces around a large amount, as may be expected for the type of analysis being done, while Hx is much more heavily weighted and smoothed. Is your 70% for LeafDD called H and also moves about less or is the 70% based on the one comparison of mohms data?

Unfortunately we lack much calibration of Hx to know whether it is really measuring the resistance by a similar method as LeafDD or whether it is some other factor that represents a loss of capacity that hasn’t been subject to calculation errors like we see for Ah/SoH.
 
dwl said:
Unfortunately we lack much calibration of Hx to know whether it is really measuring the resistance by a similar method as LeafDD or whether it is some other factor that represents a loss of capacity that hasn’t been subject to calculation errors like we see for Ah/SoH.

Why do you insist on making H/Hx more difficult than it really is? Both LeafSpy and LeafDD both read the same data (0xXX) from the BMS
and present it without any modifications/calculations. If you think the H/Hx represents something other than what has been noted,
then please compile data which would indicate otherwise. If you haven't, buy LeafSpy Pro and start analyzing your own data.

You do realize that battery resistance is a key variable with regard to degradation for ANY battery, right? So it's very likely that Nissan
wanted that parameter determined by the BMS over time AND presented as another measure of the relative state of the battery's
health/degradation. Obviously as is case for SOH (a relative present Ahrs to the new Ahrs), having a parameter, e.g. H/Hx, would
be useful, right?

dwl said:
The H measurement is mentioned separately in the LeafDD documentation. I read those notes as saying mohms is a calculation by LeafDD while H is extracted from the BMS. Sorry I don’t have LeafDD.

Correct. A battery resistance determination is done by using the method; R (battery) = delta V ( a change in battery voltage) divided
by delta I (a change in battery current). Every time hard acceleration is done, LeafDD calculates the battery resistance (SIMPLE).
The same approach can be used with LeafSpy. That shouldn't be too difficult to understand, right?

dwl said:
Your data is very interesting. Your mohms data bounces around a large amount, as may be expected for the type of analysis being done, while Hx is much more heavily weighted and smoothed.

That's not true! My time series battery resistance data doesn't "bounce around a large amount". You do realize that the battery resistance
has two independent variables, i.e. time and temperature, SOC has basically no effect, right?

11/20/14 -13,700 miles, 76 mohms per LeafDD, 20 Deg, 73% SOC
11/27 -13,800 miles, 67 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 63% SOC
11/30 - 13,900 miles, 56 mohms per LeafDD, 27 deg, 71% SOC
12/2 - 14.100 miles, 55 mohms per LeafDD, 28 deg, 67% SOC
12/16 - 14,500 miles, 89 mohms per LeafDD, 15 deg, 93% SOC
12/27/14 - 14,800 miles, 103 mohms per LeafDD, 11 deg, 24% SOC
3/10 - 17,400 miles, 60 mohms per LeafDD, 30 deg, 73% SOC
3/14 - 17, 550 miles, 56 mohms per LeafDD, 32 deg, 47% SOC
4/14 - 19,100 miles, 59 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg. 38% SOC
5/4 - 19,989 miles, 64 mohms per LeafDD, 24 deg. 48% SOC
5/15 - 20,400 miles, 73 mohms per LeafDD, 20 deg. 41% SOC
5/22 - 20,700 miles, 58 mohms per LeafDD, 28 deg. 50% SOC
12/10/15 - 28,000 miles, 90 mohms per LeafDD, 19 deg. 92% SOC
4/5 - 32,000 miles, 74 mohms per LeafDD, 24 deg, 55% SOC
5/16 - 33,700 miles,89 mohms per LeafDD, 22 deg, 47% SOC
5/16 - 33.700 miles, 58 mohms per LeafDD, 31 deg, 76% SOC
10/5 - 39,300 miles, 100 mohms per LeafDD, 22 deg, 50% SOC
10/6 - 39,400 miles, 61 mohms per LeafDD, 30 deg, 51% SOC
10/7 - 39,500 miles, 80 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 56% SOC
10/15 - 40,000 miles, 71 mohms per LeafDD, 27 deg, 45% SOC
10/30 - 41,000 miles, 74 mohms per LeafDD, 23 deg, 66% SOC
12/26/16 - 43,000 miles, 110 mohms per LeafDD, 13 deg, 77% SOC
6/10/17 - 49,600 miles, 89 mohms per LeafDD, 19 deg, 70% SOC
4/2/18 - 62,000 miles, 110 mohms per LeafDD, 18 deg, 94% SOC
6/13/18 - 65,000 miles, 84 mohms per LeafDD, 26 deg, 52% SOC

Again, still waiting for your data gathering and analysis with regard to your interpretation of H/Hx. Have you bought the LeafSpy Pro app yet,
i.e. it's a great app? If you feel that additional data from LeafSpy would help you to analyze H/Hx, put a request to Jim (Turbo3). He's always
receptive to LeafSpy update ideas. The Telsa version of LeafSpy (TM-Spy) has a helpful mode for determining battery resistance.
 
lorenfb said:
Why do you insist on making H/Hx more difficult than it really is? Both LeafSpy and LeafDD both read the same data (0xXX) from the BMS and present it without any modifications/calculations. If you think the H/Hx represents something other than what has been noted, then please compile data which would indicate otherwise. If you haven't, buy LeafSpy Pro and start analyzing your own data.
I agree H and Hx are read directly. Most people are saying they think it measures resistance but are not sure - you seem more certain. Over time resistance rises and the capacity drops. I don't have any evidence that says H/Hx is only a resistance measurement. You are tying it to the mohms calculation as evidence which is fine as a sample but nobody else I have found has done to this extent so this is limited evidence.

I have used Leaf Spy Pro since early 2016 and encourage others to buy this version. I don't have LeafDD. I see the Hx tracking down as the battery ages. Is it measuring resistance? I don't know.

lorenfb said:
You do realize that battery resistance is a key variable with regard to degradation for ANY battery, right? So it's very likely that Nissan wanted that parameter determined by the BMS over time AND presented as another measure of the relative state of the battery's health/degradation. Obviously as is case for SOH (a relative present Ahrs to the new Ahrs), having a parameter, e.g. H/Hx, would
be useful, right?
I totally agree it would be useful. I am trying to confirm whether H/Hx is a reasonably accurate measure of resistance.

lorenfb said:
Correct. A battery resistance determination is done by using the method; R (battery) = delta V ( a change in battery voltage) divided by delta I (a change in battery current). Every time hard acceleration is done, LeafDD calculates the battery resistance (SIMPLE).
The same approach can be used with LeafSpy. That shouldn't be too difficult to understand, right?
I have previously done the same calculations from Leaf Spy Pro logs and determined mohms. While it seemed related to Hx it was by no means a good correlation and Hx could have been a capacity indication as my battery has also been slowly losing capacity over the last 2.5 years.

lorenfb said:
dwl said:
Your data is very interesting. Your mohms data bounces around a large amount, as may be expected for the type of analysis being done, while Hx is much more heavily weighted and smoothed.
lorenfb said:
That's not true! My time series battery resistance data doesn't "bounce around a large amount". You do realize that the battery resistance has two independent variables, i.e. time and temperature, SOC has basically no effect, right?
Using some examples:
11/20/14 -13,700 miles, 76 mohms per LeafDD, 20 Deg, 73% SOC
11/27 -13,800 miles, 67 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 63% SOC
11/30 - 13,900 miles, 56 mohms per LeafDD, 27 deg, 71% SOC
12/2 - 14.100 miles, 55 mohms per LeafDD, 28 deg, 67% SOC
A difference of around 30% for a temperature change of 8° - to me this is a large variation - which one should be used?

And this group over a few days:
10/5 - 39,300 miles, 100 mohms per LeafDD, 22 deg, 50% SOC
10/6 - 39,400 miles, 61 mohms per LeafDD, 30 deg, 51% SOC
10/7 - 39,500 miles, 80 mohms per LeafDD, 25 deg, 56% SOC
using the first and last that is 20% difference for 3°and 40% for 8° using first two - which is right?

I don't believe the resistance changes this much with temperature and hence used the term bounces around. The H/Hx is far more sluggish to change. I do appreciate you sharing this data as only LeafDD is providing this visibility outside the INL pulse resistance results (which incidentally do have strange answers at high and low SoC).
 
Back
Top