12kW OpenEVSE vs 15 kW JuiceBox Base
- Thread starter kubel
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
That was then, and this is now. Like all new electronic companies struggling to start up, the "roadmap" to your future product is not always quite certain at first. I read a LOT of criticism about the lack of UL approval and now that they are getting it, don't you think they got the message about any remaining safety concerns? I believe it will cost in the neighborhood of $100,000 to get UL approval. To me, that sounds like this still very small startup is definitely getting behind the banner of open source EVSE product safety is their #1 priority. Of course, they still don't have it yet, but it is my understanding they are definitely working on it to be introduced with their next generation JuiceBox design.
chris1howell
Well-known member
pchilds said:
I have to agree, If you have followed both OpenEVSE and Juicebox, you would know OpenEVSE has been focused on safety since day 1 and has never sold a product that has been questioned by the community for its safety... EMW was publicly shamed into adding GFCI and dropping the unprotected 120 + 120 to 240v "widow maker" device. Juicebox may be working on UL but they have shipped many many units that would not even come close to passing.
EMW still sells a potentially unsafe device. You can buy a Juicebox today in kit or assembled that has a 30A J1772 cord, a 50A plug and NO FUSES... Fuses are standard on all 30A OpenEVSE kits.
So... to summarize this thread a basic OpenEVSE costs about the same as a basic Juicebox. A loaded OpenEVSE costs about the same as a loaded Juicebox... A Loaded OpenEVSE costs about the same as a built Juicebox basic...
I personally think the best value of any EVSE on the market is the basic OpenEVSE kit for $187.50 http://store.openevse.com/products/openevse-30a-basic-charge-station-combo
The equivalent Juicebox with a is 179.99 + 29.99 (wall mount) = 209.98 . A quick look at both products, source information and documentation should convince anyone OpenEVSE is far superior, safer, better engineered and less expensive than the equivalent Juicebox product.
cliff
Well-known member
A couple of years ago when I looked at OpenEVSE (have not looked recently), I saw
a few quirks. They started with a good idea of checking if the relay contacts had
become stuck closed (I had this happen on a furnace, not fun). To do this
they put voltage sensors on the output of the relays, but they also wanted to
see what voltage the EVSE was plugged in to (120 or 240), so they used these
same sensors by closing the relay, and applying full voltage on the output pins
of the EVSE for a short time. I think this was questionable for a device that is not
supposed to output any voltage unless plugged in to the car. They also used
these same sensors to detect if a ground existed, so now a ground could only
be detected either when the EVSE is 1st plugged in, or while charging. Also looked
like the ground current for this detection would be greater than the commercial unit
I ended up using. There also was no lightning protection circuits described, it
was left to the builder to design their own. Again I have not checked to see if
any of this has changed.
a few quirks. They started with a good idea of checking if the relay contacts had
become stuck closed (I had this happen on a furnace, not fun). To do this
they put voltage sensors on the output of the relays, but they also wanted to
see what voltage the EVSE was plugged in to (120 or 240), so they used these
same sensors by closing the relay, and applying full voltage on the output pins
of the EVSE for a short time. I think this was questionable for a device that is not
supposed to output any voltage unless plugged in to the car. They also used
these same sensors to detect if a ground existed, so now a ground could only
be detected either when the EVSE is 1st plugged in, or while charging. Also looked
like the ground current for this detection would be greater than the commercial unit
I ended up using. There also was no lightning protection circuits described, it
was left to the builder to design their own. Again I have not checked to see if
any of this has changed.
Both have their good points, and both have been introducing better and safer design changes over time, but "I" believe an open source EVSE in the hands of end users to build themselves is inherently UNSAFE, or at least not likely to be "as safe" as a preassembled (and fully tested) unit from the product manufacturer. Not because of the design, but because of the seemingly unwise motivation to save money by building it yourself. As you know, the ONLY path toward UL approval is by not saving as much money by kitting the parts to build it yourself, but by properly and consistently preassembling each unit and testing it ready to plug n play. And who is best qualified to do this? Certainly not all possible end user customers!
This is simply not a prudent policy with any "high voltage" AC product in "kit" form, and surely is the cause of many, many customer technical support inquiries no matter which EVSE we are discussing. The same issue comes up frequently in forum discussions about wiring in your own 240V outlet. In the hands of the inexperienced and non-professional, this can become a MAJOR safety concern. But it happens all the time as motivated usually by saving money! Hey, I'm guilty of doing it as are many others here, (although in my defense, I once was thoroughly trained and certified as an Nuclear Power Plant Electrician in the NAVY).
Sadly, in the final analysis, the #1 priority is almost always, first and foremost, about saving money.
If the JuiceBox UL approval fee is in fact anywhere close to 100,000 bucks, and it were to be amortized over the cost of say the next 1000 units to be sold, the list price could well go up by $100! I don't expect a substantial JuiceBox price increase, if any, but I have no way to know, or for that matter if fuses will be incorporated into the next generation design, but at least EMW is not overly concerned about SAVING MONEY by trying to dodge the issue of gaining approval of the most recognized safety agency in the world.
KUDOS to EMW for that!!!
This is simply not a prudent policy with any "high voltage" AC product in "kit" form, and surely is the cause of many, many customer technical support inquiries no matter which EVSE we are discussing. The same issue comes up frequently in forum discussions about wiring in your own 240V outlet. In the hands of the inexperienced and non-professional, this can become a MAJOR safety concern. But it happens all the time as motivated usually by saving money! Hey, I'm guilty of doing it as are many others here, (although in my defense, I once was thoroughly trained and certified as an Nuclear Power Plant Electrician in the NAVY).
Sadly, in the final analysis, the #1 priority is almost always, first and foremost, about saving money.
If the JuiceBox UL approval fee is in fact anywhere close to 100,000 bucks, and it were to be amortized over the cost of say the next 1000 units to be sold, the list price could well go up by $100! I don't expect a substantial JuiceBox price increase, if any, but I have no way to know, or for that matter if fuses will be incorporated into the next generation design, but at least EMW is not overly concerned about SAVING MONEY by trying to dodge the issue of gaining approval of the most recognized safety agency in the world.
KUDOS to EMW for that!!!
AlanSqB
Well-known member
For anyone unable to determine the best option after a thoughtful review of the schematics, specifications and other available documentation; I recommend the following link.
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Schneide...ic-Vehicle-Charging-Station-EV230WS/203670265
http://www.homedepot.com/p/Schneide...ic-Vehicle-Charging-Station-EV230WS/203670265
chris1howell
Well-known member
cliff said:
Any design has technical trade-off or quarks, OpenEVSE has always strives to comply with SAE J1772, NEC Article 625 and UL2231/UL2251. I believe OpenEVSE meets this goal.
You are correct Stuck Relay detection is a important feature of any good Charging Station. OpenEVSE goes a step further and after detecting a fault removes power from the second relay.
cliff said:
Not exactly... OpenEVSE first does a GFCI self test and a stuck relay test... then it turns on a the pilot and checks if a vehicle is plugged in if yes it uses defaults. If there is no vehicle connected then it activates relay 1 checks the line opens relay 1 then it activates relay 2 checks line 2 and closes relay 2. Full Voltage is not applied to the line. This self test approach is exactly the same as many commercial units including the Nissan/Panasonic EVSE delivered with the Nissian LEAF.
cliff said:
This is correct, The purpose of J1772 charging stations is to protect user at the J1772 plug. Ground is checked on Start up and continuously while charging. While idle the relays are open, checking ground while idle provides no added benefit. Another sensor could be added but there is really nothing gained by doing so.
OpenEVSE originally used 22k flame proof resistors for the check which is about 5ma each leg to groung for the test. This was increased to 47k, the current value does not trip standard 5ma GFCI outlet.
cliff said:
A Charging Station is basically a smart switch, very few Commercial units include lightning/surge protection. The ones that do include only very basic implementations including a MOV(s) which fail without warning and leave you unprotected without knowing...This added protection is not required by J1772, NEC or UL and is optional on OpenEVSE. If a builder lives in an are with significant risk, I recommend installing a Square D SDSA1175 which cost around $25 on Amazon. This provides much better protection than a home built unit or any commercial EVSE, it also alerts you when the unit is no longer functioning.
chris1howell
Well-known member
dsinned said:
EMW has claimed to be working on UL since before Juicebox #1 was shipped, maybe they are working on it...? That does not mean anything for the safety of the Juicebox shipping in the past or today. I am not sure where you get your information about the resources of "the competition" but "OpenEVSE LLC" does have the resources for UL listing. The decision to not seek listing was a business decision not about available resources. I have quotes from both UL and ETL for testing the cost is between 30k and 40k. The market for commercial EVSE is already saturated, $500 units from established manufactures who make decent products are everywhere. If you spread the development costs into the cost of your product then the market has just another option in a already flooded market.
Sure OpenEVSE has less staff then EMW but with limited resources, as a community we have accomplished quite a lot over the last 3 years. Without OpenEVSE.... Would the Juicebox be where it is today? The hardware design is VERY similar to OpenEVSE. EMW may pass OpenEVSE one day on units sold but that is okay. EMW is selling to both the DIY community and the general public. OpenEVSE is focused on the technology and the Open Source movement.
chris1howell said:
Personally I think a 4th instance of EMW showing that they are not fully committed to safety is that they sold pre-assembled units without NRTL certification to people who were not hobbyist but were just looking for a cheap EVSE. These people assumed they were getting a product which would be comparable to other manufacturers units when in fact it is not.
I wouldn't mind being proven wrong but I suspect we'll not see a JuiceBox that is NRTL certified. Saying you are working on getting approval while continuing to sell non NRTL certified products is not an example of showing that safety is their #1 priority.
So just to recap:
Originally was going to sell an EVSE with no GFCI (BTW: The Manzanita Micro P3 does have GFCI)
Actually marketed a Quick220 device which had zero safety features and exposed live wires
Sells non isolated chargers (I see a trend that companies selling non isolated chargers don't take safety seriously)
Sold a pre assembled units as if they were a product comparable to all the other EVSEs on the market but without NRTL certification
OpenEVSE is very much a DIY project where the builder is actively taking on the risk that comes along with this and knows this when purchasing.
JuiceBox is basically the same thing except its also sold pre-assembled and marketed as a solid product when its not.
chris1howell
Well-known member
pchilds said:
The title on Amazon is even worse... "Juicebox Level 2 15kW 60A EV Home Charging Station (Base Edition) with Input Cable, J1772 32A 25ft Output Cable"
Is it 15kw 60A? 50A? 32A??? so... it comes with a NEMA 14-50 50A plug, 60A relay, and 32A J1772 with no fuses.
The average Amazon shopper may be confused and try to charge a RAV 4 at 10kw or a Tesla even higher well above the 7.6kw/32A limit of the J1772 cable and there are no fuses to protect cable from over current. I am not saying fuses are required in all cases... A 50A breaker can protect an EVSE which is designed for a 50A circuit, with all components rated at a minimum of 40A continuous. But is there is a difference in capabilities of the source circuit and components (50A input - 32A Output) then secondary protection is essential.
chris1howell
Well-known member
pchilds said:
True, EMW sells the Dostar cable rated by the manufacture at 50A as a 50A-60A cable. More reputable re-sellers like Quick Charge Power sell the cable honestly as a 50A cable.
chris1howell said:
I have used just one 50A cable. It is like a large garden hose. If fooljoe had not supplied the cable I would not have hooked it up. In my biased opinion the very light non UL approved Quick Charge Power Tesla clone is the way to go. It is small and flexible.
TonyWilliams
Well-known member
GlennD said:
I'm a bit biased myself, so I wonder if there is a market for an 80 amp version of our 40 amp cable / plug?
chris1howell
Well-known member
TonyWilliams said:
Yes, Please... I love the 40A and would develop a true 80A kit with a monster Contactor for 80A if only I could get a cable...
TonyWilliams
Well-known member
chris1howell said:
Yes, we can make that. We would likely still carry the 32 and 50 amp cables, in addition to the 40 amp.
Tony, I don't really think so . . . more than a 40A cable just does not jive with the vast of majority of home owners driving EVs, even Teslas. Installing a >50A AC power source for a "plug-in" EVSE is well beyond the scope of most household wiring upgrades. Even a NEMA 14-50R is pushing the envelop. I think most EV/home owners are of a mind, that "if it ain't already there, forget it!"
Probably the best candidates for such a power source are EV owners who also have RVs (parked at home), but I suspect the number of those homeowners is a small portion of the current L2 EVSE home charging market.
I'm not talking about the type EV people who are frequent contributors here, but the "average" EV owner who is somewhat "disinterested" in joining the online EV community and only has an EV to mostly save on gas. Those people ARE the mass market and they really don't have home wiring projects in their future after getting their first EV. They want plug-n-play charging without spending another cent on their already expensive EVs! That means most of these EVs will just use 120V household outlets to recharge or those EV people will somehow finagle a way to charge for free at work. A few will be less patient or may become curious, and only when convenient, take the public charging approach.
However, I think very few will investigate an aftermarket L2 EVSE that requires anything more than plugging in to their existing 30A electric dryer outlet and then only if that outlet is currently unused. SOME Tesla owners and other EV drivers are apt to upgrade their service entry panel and home wiring for a 50A (or greater) EV charging capability, but even they will be somewhat averse to do so if it involves a significant "home improvement" expenditure.
As an analogy, many middle class families do not have central A/C in their homes, because the AC wiring infrastructure for it did not exist when they moved in to the house. Many people either rent or lease the place where they live, so they are SOL. Again, Tesla homeowners are more apt to do this, but I wonder how many of them have gone without central A/C for the same reason.
The point is "changing" the electrical infrastructure of your domicile is kind of a big deal, and most people either won't spend the money to add more amperage capacity or simply don't miss not having power hungry electrical appliances like central A/C and likewise would miss even less a L2 EVSE charging station that requires a dedicated AC circuit rated at 50A or greater.
Not until the EV market has truly EXPLOSIVE GROWTH, will the market for 50A rated J1772 cabling do likewise. In the meantime, the vast majority of charged-at-home EVs will "get by" with 40 amps or even less!
Probably the best candidates for such a power source are EV owners who also have RVs (parked at home), but I suspect the number of those homeowners is a small portion of the current L2 EVSE home charging market.
I'm not talking about the type EV people who are frequent contributors here, but the "average" EV owner who is somewhat "disinterested" in joining the online EV community and only has an EV to mostly save on gas. Those people ARE the mass market and they really don't have home wiring projects in their future after getting their first EV. They want plug-n-play charging without spending another cent on their already expensive EVs! That means most of these EVs will just use 120V household outlets to recharge or those EV people will somehow finagle a way to charge for free at work. A few will be less patient or may become curious, and only when convenient, take the public charging approach.
However, I think very few will investigate an aftermarket L2 EVSE that requires anything more than plugging in to their existing 30A electric dryer outlet and then only if that outlet is currently unused. SOME Tesla owners and other EV drivers are apt to upgrade their service entry panel and home wiring for a 50A (or greater) EV charging capability, but even they will be somewhat averse to do so if it involves a significant "home improvement" expenditure.
As an analogy, many middle class families do not have central A/C in their homes, because the AC wiring infrastructure for it did not exist when they moved in to the house. Many people either rent or lease the place where they live, so they are SOL. Again, Tesla homeowners are more apt to do this, but I wonder how many of them have gone without central A/C for the same reason.
The point is "changing" the electrical infrastructure of your domicile is kind of a big deal, and most people either won't spend the money to add more amperage capacity or simply don't miss not having power hungry electrical appliances like central A/C and likewise would miss even less a L2 EVSE charging station that requires a dedicated AC circuit rated at 50A or greater.
Not until the EV market has truly EXPLOSIVE GROWTH, will the market for 50A rated J1772 cabling do likewise. In the meantime, the vast majority of charged-at-home EVs will "get by" with 40 amps or even less!
AlanSqB
Well-known member
What's the max rating on the J1772->Tesla dongle? I would assume it could handle 80A but I don't see any specs on their site.
This may need its own thread.
This may need its own thread.
chris1howell
Well-known member
AlanSqB said:
The tesla J1772 adaptor is rated for 80A as is the plug that comes with the HPWC.
mitch672
Well-known member
Chris and Tony, you might want to reconsider developing an 80A EVSE cable.
Tesla has just lowered the price of the High Power Wall Charger to $750
you could buy those and change the head to J-1772
Tesla has just lowered the price of the High Power Wall Charger to $750
you could buy those and change the head to J-1772
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
A thread for people happy with their Leaf
- Latest: DougWantsALeaf
-
-
-
