LEAFfan
Well-known member
RegGuheert said:
No, he lost his awhile ago, but leafkabob recently lost one (the day after I read a 13-14% loss).
Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs
- Thread starter azdre
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
No, he lost his awhile ago, but leafkabob recently lost one (the day after I read a 13-14% loss).
RegGuheert
Well-known member
O.K. I grabbed his post about losing the bar:LEAFfan said:
So, 186/232=228/281=80% so he is only down about 1% from then by my model.TickTock said:
BTW, all my '=' are within about 1%, probably within the linearity of the LEAF measurement system.
abasile said:During Year 1, we were relatively gentle in terms of cycling. However, these days we're often cycling between 80% and LBW, as the car is going down the hill (where it's hotter) much more frequently. Year 2 will not be as gentle. We'll see what effect that has.Stoaty said:Do you cycle your pack gently? I understand you still have outstanding number of Gids... of course, that cool mountain living probably isn't hurting your battery capacity any.
I am disappointed that my efforts to limit depth of discharge cycling have not yielded better results. I have been to LBW 3 times, and only one of those reached VLBW. Starting last Fall, I have been limiting 100% charges in favor of 90% charges, with 80% most common.
Even in Year 1, before you started your new job down the mountain, my understanding was that you arrived home at or near LBW quite a few times, and I would think the regen on the way down, the higher than typical power levels on the way up, and charging at the bottom at relatively warm temperatures to relatively high charge would all have some impact.
At the upper end of the scale, Boomer23's relatively good experience indicates that frequent charging to 100% also does not necessarily stress the battery as much as I expected.
It would seem likely that the battery modules are kept to very tight tolerances to minimize permanent imbalance, so I would expect that the variations we are seeing are some complex function of our actual driving, charging, and temperature patterns.
EdmondLeaf said:
It was measured an hour or two after charging. I checked again the next morning and it was 264. I'm doing an 80% charge right now. When I measure that, I'll do 100% again and measure in the morning.
EdmondLeaf
Well-known member
Good job, if you do not report 276 or more tomorrow morning I will be disappointed.
abasile
Well-known member
Yes, in terms of driving patterns, I've been harder on my pack than many. While I've never driven the car below VLBW (though I've hit VLBW after pulling into the driveway), I've been below LBW on many occasions.tbleakne said:
I am surprised that temperature appears to be such a dominant factor in battery life. Tom, if I were in your shoes, I might consider parking outside at night, or whenever your garage is warmer than the outside temperature. Then again, considering your capacity loss was in the 3-4% range for Year 1, that might not be worth the trouble.
RegGuheert
Well-known member
Yes, there should still be over 80% capacity left after 10 years given that starting trajectory.abasile said:
surfingslovak
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2011
- Messages
- 3,809
I would be careful about making such projections with this type of accuracy. We know precious little about these cells, and there is not much information forthcoming. Even if you made assumptions based on other cells, and tried to apply a model someone else came up with for a different product, it will be a rough estimate at best. Moreover, we cannot be certain what the permanent capacity loss exactly was based on a few Gid readings. Let's wait for more data. That said, I agree that the capacity fade projection is in the right ballpark. My point is that it's too early to make such predictions with this level of confidence given the data we have.RegGuheert said:
EdmondLeaf
Well-known member
Steve, I am satisfy with result you got. Do it again on timer to 80% in the evening, and the override, and measure in the morning, my calculation was based on ratio between to ideal numbers 231 and 281
RegGuheert
Well-known member
Do you know when your car was manufactured? You might see that reported on a service receipt...Cheezmo said:
surfingslovak
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2011
- Messages
- 3,809
Welcome, number eight! I see that you are in Phoenix, and it's a white Leaf. Are white and red the most popular colors there, would you know?cyellen said:
Ingineer
Well-known member
I'll go on my usual tirade again saying that Gids cannot be used to accurately calculate SoC. So far nobody anywhere (except maybe Nissan Engineers or those with beta LEAFSCAN units) can really read SoC. People should avoid the use of gid-based SoC, as once the true SoC is available, this real number is not going to match what Gidmeters report.LEAFfan said:
-Phil
Ingineer
Well-known member
A charge set to 80% stops at 80% SoC (real SoC, not what Gidmeters report), whereas a "full" charge usually is stopped from 94-95% SoC. So the difference is only ~15% of the total pack capacity. A charge to true 100% SoC would give you about 24kWh, but the battery ECU is more interested in making the pack last long, (or at least attempting to, Sorry Phoenix!) so it never allows that truly "full" charge.RegGuheert said:
Packs that routinely see 80% charges are usually more out of balance, so the initial full charge is usually less than even 94% until it gets a chance to rebalance. This will also make a full-charge Gid reading artificially low. For those attempting to assess capacity with Gids, several full charges in a row may be needed to peak your Gids to the real level.
-Phil
Ingineer
Well-known member
One other factor to consider, is that it appears that a hot pack will not fully charge. I've noticed on a few occasions less charge if my pack is warmer than normal.
So it may very well be that when it cools off some lost "capacity" will return, though unfortunately I don't expect cars with lost capacity bars to regain them.
-Phil
So it may very well be that when it cools off some lost "capacity" will return, though unfortunately I don't expect cars with lost capacity bars to regain them.
-Phil
Stoaty
Well-known member
Very interesting. Where did you get this nugget? Beta Leafscan feedback?Ingineer said:
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
Stoaty said:Very interesting. Where did you get this nugget? Beta Leafscan feedback?Ingineer said:
have seen AND reported the same thing. i dont even do 80% charges. i simply plug in a few hours a day every few days or so. but do do 100% every so often to check my GID count. and yesterday it was 272 which is lowest ive seen, but it normally takes me 2-3 charges to 100% to get back to my 280
now i did not charge to 100% today since i only drove 25 miles yesterday and figure to do about the same today. but due to possible concerns over permanent loss i will charge to 100% for tomorrow to see where i am at
So here's my question...should I do anything? I assume the dealer cannot do anything about it, right? I never needed all the range (with some exception of course), so I am not worried (yet). I hate the fact that there is anything "negative" about my EV experience, but the sky isn't falling and I don't want to make a mountain out of a molehill (after all, everyone knew the battery wasn't going to last forever).
I assume someone from Nissan reads this and is counting like the rest of us, right?
I assume someone from Nissan reads this and is counting like the rest of us, right?
Similar threads
