SAE Planning vote to formally deny CHAdeMO in US

[lpickup]

What am I missing? That plug won't fit either connector in my car.

You're not missing anything. You're right: that plug won't fit into any connector on the LEAF.

I don't see how a connector in tomorrow's cars could be designed to take both that plug and today's J1772 plugs.

I believe you're right again, if you're talking about the new "light gray" connector shown here:

That does not appear to me anyway to be compatible with J1772.

The "black" plug pictured here:

would happily take a standard J1772.

So who knows if the garygid's speculation is correct that the "gray" image circulating through the press this week is actually an older concept image or whether they really have (very stupidly!) changed from a seemingly compatible port to an incompatible port. I suspect the matter will be cleared up shortly and we'll know.

 

[edatoakrun]

What am I missing? That plug won't fit either connector in my car...

Ray

If I understand the proposal, that plug would only be installed at SAE DC stations, if any are ever built.

AC stations will continue to use the same J1772 plugs now in use.

IMO, the SAE does not understand the economics of EV charging.

The benefits of the single port, are quite limited. The SAE arguments in favor seem to come down to:

EV owners can't figure out which port to use?

I think if I ever encounter a DC charger for my LEAF, figuring out which of the two ports to plug it into, will not be beyond my intellectual abilities.

Auto designers cant find locations on BEVs for 2 charge ports?

That pretty much dooms the PHEV future, unless SAE comes up with a very clever combined AC/DC/Gasoline fuel port...

IMO, the benefits of separate DC and AC charge ports, are far greater.

In the future, I would expect the charger and inverter on BEVs to move out of the vehicle, and to the charge stations, both public and private.

This is a far more efficient infrastructure design, than carrying the extra cost, and weight, of the charger, in every BEV.

We only carry the charger in the car today, since the BEV DC charging infrastructure is so limited, we need the option to plug into the entire AC grid, at 120 or 240 volts, the L1/L2 option.

IMO, locking BEVs into the ungainly SAE combined AC/DC port design, would only slow future DC infrastructure development, and BEV sales.

Of course, that could be the intent of its proponents...

 

[mkjayakumar]

Of course, that could be the intent of its proponents...

I am not the one to be carried away by conspiracies, but when it comes to EVs i am beginning to believe that nothing is too far fetched.

 

[spike09]

Of course, that could be the intent of its proponents...

I am not the one to be carried away by conspiracies, but when it comes to EVs i am beginning to believe that nothing is too far fetched.

The SAE are at the heart of the auto mechanic industry. They have much to lose if EVs become the dominant mode of transportation. Car dealer networks also realize selling EV vastly reduces the need for a Service Department. At least we have the Body Shop on our side but I think they are also certified by the SAE!

 

[ksnogas2112]

One Plug to rule them all
One Plug to find them
One Plug to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them
In the land of OIL, where the shadows lie

 

[scottf200]

Some have stated there will be two version of the top half with the bottom being the "same" for DC. European - the IEC 62196 Type 2 and "USA/etc" - the J1772.
See:
IEC_62196-3_.E2.80.93_DC_Charging - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_62196#IEC_62196-3_.E2.80.93_DC_Charging" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
and
Combined_Charging_System - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEC_62196#Combined_Charging_System" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Combined Charging System
While the target to have only one charging connector has been lost in that the world is split on their main grid system with Japan and North America to choose a single-phase connector on their 100-120/240 Volt grid (Type 1) while the rest of the world including China and Europe is opting for a connector with single-phase 230 Volt and three-phase 400 Volt grid access (Type 2). The SAE and ACEA are trying to avoid the situation for DC charging with a standardization that plans add DC wires to the existing AC connector types such that there is only one "global envelope" that fits all DC charging stations - for Type 2 the new housing is named Combo2.[31]

On the 15th International VDI-Congress of the Association of German Engineers the proposal of a "Combined Charging System" was unveiled on 12. October 2011 in Baden-Baden. Seven car makers (Audi, BMW, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen) have agreed to introduce the Combined Charging System in mid-2012.[46][47] This defines a single connector pattern on the vehicle side that offers enough space for a Type 1 or Type 2 connector along with space for a two pin DC connector allowing up to 200 Ampere.

From articles yesterday.

Audi, BMW, Chrysler, Daimler, Ford, General Motors, Porsche and Volkswagen have agreed to support a harmonized single-port fast charging approach – called DC Fast Charging with a Combined Charging System – for use on electric vehicles in Europe and the United States.

Live charging demonstrations will be conducted during the Electric Vehicle Symposium 26 (EVS26) May 6-9.

The combined charging system integrates one-phase AC-charging, fast three-phase AC-charging, DC-charging at home and ultra-fast DC-charging at public stations into one vehicle inlet. This will allow customers to charge at most existing charging stations regardless of power source and may speed more affordable adoption of a standardized infrastructure.

The International Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) has chosen the Combined Charging System as the fast-charging methodology for a standard that incrementally extends the existing Type 1-based AC charging. The standard is to be officially published this summer. ACEA, the European association of vehicle manufacturers has also selected the Combined Charging System as its AC/DC charging interface for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017.

The charging system design was based on collaborative reviews and analysis of existing charging strategies, the ergonomics of the connector and preferences of U.S. and European customers. The system was developed for all international vehicle markets and creates a uniform standard with identical electrical systems, charge controllers, package dimensions and safety mechanisms.

The system maximizes capability for integration with future smart grid developments through common broadband communication methods regardless of the global location of the charging system. The combined charging approach will reduce development and infrastructure complexity, improve charging reliability, reduce the total cost-of-ownership for end customers and provide low maintenance costs.

Commercially available combined charging units are projected to be available later this year.

All committed OEMs have vehicles in development which will use the Combined Charging System.

The first vehicles to use this system will reach the market in 2013.

 

[edatoakrun]

Single multi-purpose product designs make sense...sometimes.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/61320/saturday-night-live-shimmer-floor-wax" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[lpickup]

Single multi-purpose product designs make sense...sometimes.

Well I think we need to admit that the apparent distaste for the combined connector is mainly because our LEAFs have 2 connectors. If the situation were reversed and our LEAFs had a combined connector and the SAE was proposing separate connectors that we'd all be up in arms about the SAE's "wasteful use of two separate ports on the car".

I actually think the combined connector is a pretty elegant solution. My problem with it is that the standards body went to the trouble of inventing a new standard when one already existed, and even worse, they did it for "political" reasons, apparently not for technical reasons. This happens all the time in my industry and it pisses me off to no end.

 

[garygid]

The SAE one-plug globally has apparently gone to a USA plug
(the J1772-L2 socket compatible "TuHengLo" plug and socket
that we have seen before), and a Mennekes-compatible European
version (the new compact "flat-top" pictures/renderings seen above).

So, TWO new (yet unused) standards!

So, there seem to be at least 7 "modern" standards:
1. Chademo (Japan & USA)
2. Chinamo (China)
3. Mennekmo (Euro)
4. SAeKeMo (USA)
5. maybe TeslaMo ?
6. J1772-Mo (L1 USA & L2 Japan, USA, England)
7. Mennekes (Euro)

 

[Devin]

The SAE one-plug globally has apparently gone to a USA plug
(the J1772-L2 socket compatible "TuHengLo" plug and socket
that we have seen before), and a Mennekes-compatible European
version (the new compact "flat-top" pictures/renderings seen above).

So, TWO new (yet unused) standards!

So, there seem to be at least 7 "modern" standards:
1. Chademo (Japan & USA)
2. Chinamo (China)
3. Mennekmo (Euro)
4. SAeKeMo (USA)
5. maybe TeslaMo ?
6. J1772-Mo (L1 USA & L2 Japan, USA, England)
7. Mennekes (Euro)

There was a 50kW fast charge unit developed using MagneCharge and the small MagneCharge (SPI) was capable of up to 80kW and theoretically 120kW. The large MagneCharge (LPI) was capable of 160kW. This was in 1998.

I know we've moved beyond it for various reasons but I always liked MagneCharge and thought it was a clever, simple, and durable L2/L3 system.

 

[edatoakrun]

"lpickup"
Well I think we need to admit that the apparent distaste for the combined connector is mainly because our LEAFs have 2 connectors. If the situation were reversed and our LEAFs had a combined connector and the SAE was proposing separate connectors that we'd all be up in arms about the SAE's "wasteful use of two separate ports on the car".

I actually think the combined connector is a pretty elegant solution...

To what "problem"?

And does it create larger present and future problems, in this "solution"?

The fact is, no one knows what the future of BEV charging standards will be.

I certainly hope that, in the not too-distant future, a charge standard faster than 50 kW DC will be available.

And inductive charging, may largely replace the J1772 L1/L2 standard.

So it's not like the SAE combo plug should be expected to be the sole "permanent" standard, even if the manufactures who "adopt" it, ever make a commitment to build BEVs that use it.

It is true, that the main advantage of the CHAdeMO standard, is that every one of the tens of thousands of mass-produced DC fast charging capable BEVs, and every one of the thousands(?) of DC stations around the world use it.

But, IMO, that advantage, currently outweighs all other considerations, and the future BEV marketplace would probably confirm a present de-facto CHAdeMO standard, worldwide.

Unless government directives get in the way, like they have in California, where, apparently, all State-funded DC Charge stations will have to be SAE equipped, once the first (of very few, no doubt) Chevy Sparks is delivered.

 

[lpickup]

I actually think the combined connector is a pretty elegant solution...

To what "problem"?

To needing a vehicle that can accept both AC and DC charging.

And does it create larger present and future problems, in this "solution"?

I don't know. Does it? Does ChaDeMo?

Again, I'm not talking about the fact that it's introducing a competing standard. I do think that is a huge problem. What I'm talking about is the technical elegance of the "single" port solution, not the fact that for political reasons it's being introduced as a competing standard.

And inductive charging, may largely replace the J1772 L1/L2 standard.

I certainly hope not. I think wireless charging is great in many instances (public parking for example), but in others (like my garage) I prefer to take the 20 seconds to physically plug in and avoid 3-5% losses (not to mention the added expense of the wireless dock).

It is true, that the main advantage of the CHAdeMO standard, is that every one of the tens of thousands of mass-produced DC fast charging capable BEVs, and every one of the thousands(?) of DC stations around the world use it.

Agreed, but I think time will tell whether the head start that ChaDeMo enjoys is going to be enough. It probably will, and I obviously have no problem if it does. But I'm not going to fool myself into thinking that the powers that be don't have the ability to negate that advantage, as you state below.

Unless government directives get in the way, like they have in California, where, apparently, all State-funded DC Charge stations will have to be SAE equipped, once the first (of very few, no doubt) Chevy Sparks is delivered.

Let me try to rephrase what I'm trying to say with a thought experiment:

Let's say that things were reversed and the LEAF and iMiEV came out with the a "single" port connector like what is being proposed by the SAE. And let's say that the SAE, because of whatever motivations they have (I'm perfectly fine with assuming it's a concerted effort to slow down/halt adoption of EVs as the consensus around here is) decided to roll out their own DC charging port which looked exactly like ChaDeMo (with its second connector). And let's say everything else is the same: same tens of thousands of "single-port" connector vehicles released, same thousands of "single-port" charging stations available in Europe, and 100 (maybe) growing to maybe 500 (shortly) in the US, and absolutely ZERO ChaDeMo-like charging stations and vehicles released.

Would you then be defending the dual port ChaDeMo-like solution?

If I understand where you are coming from, the answer would be no...because to you (and me too by the way!) the important thing is going with an established (even if it just a de facto) standard. If I'm right about this, your real complaint is not the single-port connector, but just the fact that they are trying to shove a new standard at us. And I agree wholeheartedly with you there!

But unfortunately people don't argue that point, rather they pick on the fact that it's a "franken-port" or a "monstronsity", when I actually think that that aspect of it is the only good thing about it!

 

[TRONZ]

I think debating about "the plug" is pointless and pretty much the kind of confusion SAE and American manufacturers want on this issue. Does deliberately creating a "disagreement or debate" to stall public action by so called experts remind you of any other public perception campains waged by the energy industry??? This is just another piece of this industries disruption of public action game. Stepping back though, the point of early adoption is to adopt! Not talk about it, but do it! This is is done by supporting the best standards out there and most importantly of all, AVAILABLE! Will something better come along someday? Yes, always! But don't be fooled into thinking that planning to adopt vaporware sometime in the future is gonna get QC infrastructure installed today.

Industries only take decisive action when they think their profits/influence are at risk. If you want SAE then do everything you can to get any other standard adopted. Watch how fast industry reacts when they actually feel at risk.

 

[davewill]

... But don't be fooled into thinking that planning to adopt vaporware sometime in the future is gonna get QC infrastructure installed today. ...

Paying at least lip service to SAE support may well be the only way to keep CHAdeMO from stalling in the US. It does no good to ignore it if potential site owners and government agencies are listening to the SAE crowd.

 

[TRONZ]

... But don't be fooled into thinking that planning to adopt vaporware sometime in the future is gonna get QC infrastructure installed today. ...

Paying at least lip service to SAE support may well be the only way to keep CHAdeMO from stalling in the US. It does no good to ignore it if potential site owners and government agencies are listening to the SAE crowd.

The good news is that with gas prices high we have left the time of talk and entered a time of action. The recent CA QC settlement is a perfect example. It's time for action and the SAE has nothing so all stations will be CHAdeMO. This pattern will likely continue when the public forces action to be taken.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Didn't the SAE publish the first standard for horse drawn buggies in 1961? By the time any one of these manufactures actually have an electric car to market the physical plug-in application will be obsolete.

OK, sounds good. Still, kiss your Leaf QC port goodbye.

"the Combined Charging System as its AC/DC-charging interface for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017."

 

[cwerdna]

Didn't the SAE publish the first standard for horse drawn buggies in 1961? By the time any one of these manufactures actually have an electric car to market the physical plug-in application will be obsolete.

OK, sounds good. Still, kiss your Leaf QC port goodbye.

"the Combined Charging System as its AC/DC-charging interface for all new vehicle types in Europe beginning in 2017."

I'd also read the 2017 date from an article yeseterday (cited earlier in this thread too) but http://green.autoblog.com/2012/05/04/u-s-german-automakers-will-demo-fast-charging-system-at-evs26/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; in the press release claims:

The Society of International Engineers has chosen the single-port fast charging method as its standard for fast charging and the European manufacturing association (ACEA) has endorsed harmonization for all vehicle types
Chargers will be available commercially as of the end of 2012 and vehicles using the technology will be available starting 2013.

 

[smkettner]

I think the J standard should just accomodate 80 amps up to 600 volts, 48kW right there. Auto ranging onboard charger and let it rip.
Skip the DC-J franken plug.

 

[planet4ever]

I think the J standard should just accomodate 80 amps up to 600 volts, 48kW right there. Auto ranging onboard charger and let it rip.

So, how much is that 48kW onboard charger going to weigh, and how much will it cost? This sounds a lot worse to me than carrying an ICE around with you all the time because you might want to use it occasionally.

Ray

 

[KeiJidosha]

I think the J standard should just accomodate 80 amps up to 600 volts, 48kW right there. Auto ranging onboard charger and let it rip.

So, how much is that 48kW onboard charger going to weigh, and how much will it cost? This sounds a lot worse to me than carrying an ICE around with you all the time because you might want to use it occasionally.

Ray

It could be cheap and light Reducing Costs and Increasing Range

"The Reductive charger is onboard the vehicle, integrated into the drive system. It is not a separate unit so it requires little space and weighs less than 10 pounds."

17kW, not 48kW (240V vs 600V). Have to wait for the Renault Chameleon 43kW on-board charging to best that.