The controversy in fast charging for electric vehicles

AndyH said:

smkettner said:

I thought Leaf was just 3.3kw. Larger supply would not seem to do any good unless there was an option to upgrade the car itself.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

Click to expand...

??

We are talking about Level 3 DirectCurrent QuickCharge here (left port viewed from front of vehicle) ... not built-in charger's limit of 3.3kW using AlternatingCurrent on Level 1 & 2 SAE J1772 port (right port viewed from front of vehicle). Only remaining question is whether Level 3 port will be included in SL (upper trim level) at all or as an option with cost ($700 rumor in another thread). (EVProject: all LEAFs will have active Level 3 port on left.)

My comment was based on member evdriver's post that with public 6.6kw level 2 the level 3 is not as necessary.
I am saying anything above 3.3kw will not be utilized without changes to the Leaf.
There is another thread on the cost of the level 3 option for the Leaf.

smkettner said:

My comment was based on member evdriver's post that with public 6.6kw level 2 the level 3 is not as necessary.
I am saying anything above 3.3kw will not be utilized without changes to the Leaf.
There is another thread on the cost of the level 3 option for the Leaf.

Click to expand...

It is doubtful but I hope there is a 6kw or higher option offered for gen 1 Leafs, I am extremely confident it will be there later. Nissan really blew it on this one, give it time after people start really driving and watch the comments start.

smkettner said:

My comment was based on member evdriver's post that with public 6.6kw level 2 the level 3 is not as necessary.
I am saying anything above 3.3kw will not be utilized without changes to the Leaf.
There is another thread on the cost of the level 3 option for the Leaf.

Click to expand...

Sorry ... I misinterpreted your comment; thanks for clarifying.

More info on the issue of CHAdeMO vs the SAE approach for DC fast chargers:
http://www.keenforgreen.com/b/plug-2010-two-solutions-dc-fast-charging-evs

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

garygid said:

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

Click to expand...

x2

garygid said:

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

Click to expand...

x3

garygid said:

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

Click to expand...

X4

leaffan said:

garygid said:

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

Click to expand...

X4

Click to expand...

Yep, I already said that many posts ago in this very thread

lewis3000us said:

More info on the issue of CHAdeMO vs the SAE approach for DC fast chargers:
http://www.keenforgreen.com/b/plug-2010-two-solutions-dc-fast-charging-evs

Click to expand...

This appears to be a rehash of what we've already read from Plug-In 2010. I'm not sure the graphic accurately depicts the situation because there are CHAdeMO reps on the J1772 task force - while in the end there could be competing standards, the players seem to be in the same 'sand box' at least some of the time.

In addition, at least one CHAdeMO L3 charger is in place in London at a Mitsubishi center (the iMiev uses the TEPCO connector for quick charging). There are iMiev's in operation in Germany as well. By end of the year, there will be 100 iMiev's in Toronto - and I'll bet they'll deploy CHAdeMO L3 units there as well.

garygid said:

I think GM is stalling just to keep the Quick-Charge from being widely deployed, so that the competing EVs will remain more clearly range-limited than the Volt.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand enough of the landscape to decide for sure that GM's Kissel is stalling anything. I'm also not sure the Plug-In controversy is that important.

As I reported earlier, many of the same companies currently part of CHAdeMO are also part of the SAE J1772 task force - including a rep from TEPCO. Nissan is working on the data packets/messages required for quick charging, for example.

The J1772 L3 portion of the 'recommended practice' will be the 'SAE solution' for L3 just as J1772 is for L1 and L2. But J1772 is not mandatory. There is also a Euro standard for L2 that includes three-phase AC.

CHAdeMO is clear that they're trying to become the world-wide supplier of L3 - but only the communications and connector are officially part of the standard.

I suspect that the SAE is going to push forward on their connector just as CHAdeMO is going to continue their 'world domination tour.' I will say that as of the June J1772 meeting, the connector contractors still hadn't found a set of pins that would work - they could get good contact or ease of insertion/removal, but not both. There's always a possibility that J1772 will ultimately kill their L3 work. There's also a possibility that adding the L3 'stuff' to the current J772 connector (along with mechanical assist devices in the car and connector required to make it work) will result in a 'Frankenstein's monster' that the industry will ignore.

I don't think that the J1772 committee is stalling. But I'm disappointed that the lack of agreement for the US market is resulting in indecision from Nissan.

Go Nissan - you've got a system that works - run with it!

Does Nissan Leafs L3 Chademo "really" work? Anyone test it?

One look at the Chademo spec (version 0.9) at least indicates that as expected the CAN interface is required for the comm protocol leading to charging. I have seen slide presentations of Chademo where the ignition on is a requirement for the protocol. That makes sense considering cars with OBD-2 CAN communications require the car to be turned on to operate the CAN bus. This means that your Leaf has to be turned on to initiate L3 charging via Chademo.

This seems quite contrary to older electric cars with "interlock" circuits which for safety issues prevented any charging to proceed if the car was turned on and also to prevent a "charging" vehicle to be turned on by accident while charging.

Please someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe Chademo requires the car to be on to use the CAN on the connector and required in the protocol. This seems dangerous and wrong by design? or am I missing something.

Steve

You are missing something, that the "QC CAN" goes only from the internal charger to the QC Port, and the car does not have to be ON-to-Drive. As with L1 and L2 charging, both the internal charger (acting as the QC controller) and the battery monitoring/management (BMS) system need to be powered, as are a few other components that are "always" on.

It is very interesting that we haven't heard much about L3 chargers from Nissan or it's partners other than a lot of talk last year. If they make the current j1772 charger connection support L3, than that would be great. I would pay to upgrade my Leaf to support it (same for a 6KW L2 upgrade). Otherwise get out of the way of progress GM (you don't have any L3 skin in the game yet) and SAE.

Does anyone have the SAE complaint hotline? If so, we should all clog their phone lines demanding a L3 quick charge standard now.

GM seldom misses an opportunity to disappoint. I'm still surprised they made the Volt with it's sad but better than nothing 30 miles of mostly ev range.

I was checking out the SAE website and noticed they are meeting next on May 24th to discuss variations of the SAEj1772 standard. http://www.sae.org/servlets/works/committeeHome.do?comtID=TEVHYB3#

They also listed the name and email of one of their staff members. I reckon they could use some input from us stakeholders. So, i'll send Pat an email (CHadeMO please). I'll call, email and pen a letter to nudge them in the right direction. Any Leafers with me?

SAE Staff Representatives:
Pat Ebejer
<[email protected]>,

Contact Us!
SAE Offices and Affiliates

By Email
<[email protected]>,

By Telephone
SAE World Headquarters receptionist: 1-724-776-4841
Customer Service: 1-877-606-7323
Washington, DC Office telephone number: 1-202-463-7318
Southern Office telephone number: 1-724-776-4841

By Fax
Customer Service: 1-724-776-0790
SAE Automotive Headquarters: 1-248-273-2494
Washington, DC Office: 1-202-463-7319
Southern Office: 1-724-776-0790

By Mail (post)
SAE World Headquarters
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 USA

SAE Automotive Headquarters
755 W. Big Beaver, Suite 1600
Troy MI 48084 USA

SAE Washington Office
1200 G St., NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20005

SAE Southern Office
5 Research Drive
Greenville, SC 29607

hbleaf said:

Does Nissan Leafs L3 Chademo "really" work? Anyone test it?

Click to expand...

Yes, it really works and you plug in with your vehicle off. Process: 1) Turn off and get out of car. 2) Lock car. 3) Plug in CHAdeMO cable. 4) Press "Start." 5) Enjoy a cup of tea.

BTW, it's not L3, it's DC Quick Charge.

DarkStar said:

BTW, it's not L3, it's DC Quick Charge.

Click to expand...

The SAE can try to change labels if they wish, but it looks like CHAdeMO has all the bases covered.

CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. (Jan. 13, 2010) -- Aker Wade Power Technologies has entered into a licensing agreement with Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) to manufacture and market Level III DC fast chargers for electric vehicles. The chargers will incorporate TEPCO’s patented technology and be capable of charging vehicles such as the Nissan Leaf, Mitsubishi i MiEV and Plug-In Stella by Subaru within less than half an hour. Aker Wade is the first U.S. manufacturer that has concluded a license agreement to use this technology. The usage of technology is free of charge, but Aker Wade also joins “CHAdeMO”, an association that will start this March. The association is being founded to give drivers a sense of assurance that chargers of member manufacturers are fully compatible with electric vehicles of member OEMs.

Click to expand...

EVDrive said:

I was checking out the SAE website and noticed they are meeting next on May 24th to discuss variations of the SAEj1772 standard. http://www.sae.org/servlets/works/committeeHome.do?comtID=TEVHYB3#

They also listed the name and email of one of their staff members. I reckon they could use some input from us stakeholders. So, i'll send Pat an email (CHadeMO please). I'll call, email and pen a letter to nudge them in the right direction. Any Leafers with me?

Click to expand...

FYI - some meeting history:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=640

AndyH said:

DarkStar said:

BTW, it's not L3, it's DC Quick Charge.

Click to expand...

The SAE can try to change labels if they wish, but it looks like CHAdeMO has all the bases covered.

Click to expand...

"DC Quick Charge" is TEPCO's terminology. "Level #" are SAE terminology.

Just like technically at home I have "J1772-2010 Level 2" charging, in downtown Portland I can do "CHAdeMO DC Quick Charging." I guess technically you could do CHAdeMO DC Slow Charging too if you wanted since I can do J1772-2010 Level 1 charging...

But we get a really nasty juice when we start mashing apples and oranges that way - regardless of which language we speak at the time! :lol:

DarkStar said:

... I guess technically you could do CHAdeMO DC Slow Charging too if you wanted since I can do J1772-2010 Level 1 charging...

Click to expand...

And there's a flag on the play! :shock:

[Flipping thru the sacred book of charging, chapter 3 paragraph 7.2.5.a...]

In the beginning... [wait, that's not it... here it is... chapter 3 paragraph 7.2.7.a.4:]

...and causeth thyself to turn away from impure thoughts of crossing thine EVSE interfaces. The offspring of such a pairing are the clattering of noises and awfulness of brimstone which will come to you as a reminder of your impending need to move aimlessly from town to town by your own feet...


----
PS...please note the 'funniness' of the fact that the CHAdeMO organization, when announcing the first US licensee of their technology, called it Level III DC etc. etc.