Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[KJD]

Be sure to post and let us know when you've reported the issue to Nissan and received a Case number from them so we can update the wiki with that additional info.

Are people just calling their Nissan sales rep? Or is there some place else?

From the wiki page

Even though there have been 41 documented cases of battery capacity loss of one or more bars (as of 7/27/2012), only 20 capacity loss cases have been reported to Nissan to our knowledge. The geographic breakdown of these cases is: Arizona - 32, Texas - 8, California - 1
To report battery capacity loss to Nissan: 877-NO-GAS-EV (1-877-664-2738).

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery,_Charging_System#Real_World_Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[vrwl]

Are people just calling their Nissan sales rep? Or is there some place else?

To report battery capacity loss to Nissan: 877-NO-GAS-EV (1-877-664-2738). Follow the prompts to report a problem. The person you speak to will issue you a Case Number.

 

[mwalsh]

Highly unlikely, and that it would only damage packs in warm areas makes it even less likely.

unlikely yes. impossible? ooooh no. any computer novice will tell you that heat is a killer. what protects the Nissan pack? computers do. how do computers protect the pack? they monitor various parameters of the pack and provide operations to keep those parameters within predesigned guidelines.

excessive heat can mess up the computer's circuitry to the point that it may no longer measure accurately or respond accurately.

Agree 100%. I've seen some seriously funky sh*t due to heat. I've also seen some funky sh*t down to "dirty" power.

 

[JPWhite]

The count continues...

I've now officially fallen victim to a 2nd bar loss today at 19,345 miles, almost 14 months into my ownership. My first bar loss was at 16.5K miles back in 5/28/2012, only 2 months ago. I've called Nissan and reported my 2nd bar loss today. I'm already on the Wiki list for 1st bar loss. I've asked Stoaty to add me to the Wiki list for my 2nd bar loss in the other thread.

I don't take the LEAF to work, so it doesn't sit baked in the sun all day at work. It sits in the garage during the day unless a family member takes it on trips around town.

That's pretty high mileage if you are not commuting with the vehicle. Great to see a leaf put to good use.

 

[EdmondLeaf]

Until Nissan conclude their investigation and provide fix it appears that is only matter of time for those in hot areas.
I am patiently waiting, but it will be much easier to wait if temp will be 65F to start the day instead 96F, and 113F yesterday, and similar highs for at least another 7d.

 

[ztanos]

Highly unlikely, and that it would only damage packs in warm areas makes it even less likely.

unlikely yes. impossible? ooooh no. any computer novice will tell you that heat is a killer. what protects the Nissan pack? computers do. how do computers protect the pack? they monitor various parameters of the pack and provide operations to keep those parameters within predesigned guidelines.

excessive heat can mess up the computer's circuitry to the point that it may no longer measure accurately or respond accurately.

your blanket statement needs a much closer examination

This is true... which is why most datacenters blast the ac at 73 degrees. But since cars have computers in them these days, I would think that the computer isn't the issue. I would think that auto manufacturers have the heat figured out when it comes to the computer, since it has been sitting under ICE hoods for years now. But then again, I may be giving Nissan too much credit. It could be that they needed more processing power to run the LEAF and didn't take into account needing a bigger heatsink. This would be a huge blunder for something so "electric."

 

[JRP3]

Highly unlikely, and that it would only damage packs in warm areas makes it even less likely.

unlikely yes. impossible? ooooh no. any computer novice will tell you that heat is a killer. what protects the Nissan pack? computers do. how do computers protect the pack? they monitor various parameters of the pack and provide operations to keep those parameters within predesigned guidelines.

excessive heat can mess up the computer's circuitry to the point that it may no longer measure accurately or respond accurately.

your blanket statement needs a much closer examination

Really? I said "highly unlikely", you said "unlikely yes", so we're rather in agreement. I never said impossible. I just see it as much more likely that the battery chemistry, which we know can degrade with heat, is degrading with heat.

However, I will speculate that it may be possible that the BMS is not properly compensating for elevated pack temperatures, (which lower internal resistance), or was not properly programmed to do so, and could therefor allow a higher SOC condition at a given current and voltage. This could lead to an over charged pack, which would accelerate battery degradation.

 

[jspearman]

Had my annual battery test this morning at Avondale Nissan, and no surprise: 5 stars across the board. Still only down one bar, so keeping my fingers crossed. Asked if he had heard anything about the Casa Grande cars, and he said no, but I wasn't really expecting a different answer.

 

[EdmondLeaf]

Had my annual battery test this morning at Avondale Nissan, and no surprise: 5 stars across the board. Still only down one bar, so keeping my fingers crossed. Asked if he had heard anything about the Casa Grande cars, and he said no, but I wasn't really expecting a different answer.

Congrats on your well deserved 5 stars you doing great job. Hopefully Casa Grande will give us answers, and hopefully fix will be easy, and hopefully fix will be done

 

[mark1313]

I have had 3 battery test done all 5 stars, even tho I loss 2 bars..I would imagine you will not see a 2nd bar loss not happen until after 16000 miles..I would love to see chart where the loss of the 2nd bar has occured on the Leafs ..

Had my annual battery test this morning at Avondale Nissan, and no surprise: 5 stars across the board. Still only down one bar, so keeping my fingers crossed. Asked if he had heard anything about the Casa Grande cars, and he said no, but I wasn't really expecting a different answer.

 

[LEAFfan]

The count continues...I've now officially fallen victim to a 2nd bar loss today at 19,345 miles, almost 14 months into my ownership.

Congratulations! Your LEAF may have won a trip to Casa Grande!

 

[Volusiano]

The count continues...I've now officially fallen victim to a 2nd bar loss today at 19,345 miles, almost 14 months into my ownership.

Congratulations! Your LEAF may have won a trip to Casa Grande!

Gee, thanks, I guess!!! How do I sign up to win this lottery???

By the way, I noticed that you're from Phoenix and have had your LEAF for almost 14 months already. But I noticed that you're not even on the 1 bar loss list. Have you lost any bar yet???

 

[gbarry42]

The perfect scenario is that a specific component is found that in certain environmental and operational situations causes the issue. And that that particular component was superseded in later component releases. Then it is a simple (relatively) effort to find the cars that have this suspect component, and issue a TSB for those VINs to have it replaced with the newer component. This happens all the time with production runs of parts that are later discovered to have a defect.

I think you're onto something. They built those particular packs with the wrong internal resistor. Everyone says the internal resistance is too high. Well, just replace the resistor with the correct one.

And now, I have to apologize to all the EE's for making such an outrageously dumb joke. And then I'll have to apologize to the rest of the crowd for making them think there was actually the possibility of fixing such a thing. But while I'm on a (dubious) roll,

Let's have some fun with this and speculate that all of these cars are from the ship that left Japan days before the earthquake, were dusted with radioactive dust, and that is the reason for the capacity decrease. :lol:
Reddy.

No, the radioactive dust was responsible for the people who saw 295 GIDs and 106 miles of range. It's the pollen that's causing this batch of failures. :mrgreen:

 

[derkraut]

The perfect scenario is that a specific component is found that in certain environmental and operational situations causes the issue. And that that particular component was superseded in later component releases. Then it is a simple (relatively) effort to find the cars that have this suspect component, and issue a TSB for those VINs to have it replaced with the newer component. This happens all the time with production runs of parts that are later discovered to have a defect.

I think you're onto something. They built those particular packs with the wrong internal resistor. Everyone says the internal resistance is too high. Well, just replace the resistor with the correct one.

And now, I have to apologize to all the EE's for making such an outrageously dumb joke. And then I'll have to apologize to the rest of the crowd for making them think there was actually the possibility of fixing such a thing. But while I'm on a (dubious) roll,

Let's have some fun with this and speculate that all of these cars are from the ship that left Japan days before the earthquake, were dusted with radioactive dust, and that is the reason for the capacity decrease. :lol:
Reddy.

No, the radioactive dust was responsible for the people who saw 295 GIDs and 106 miles of range. It's the pollen that's causing this batch of failures. :mrgreen:

I'm a Christian....and I fervently believe that the Devil did it! :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

[TickTock]

Resistance is futile!

 

[gbarry42]

I'm not sure where to put this, so here's as good as any, since it's where I came across this image.
Credit again goes to TickTock.

It was an eye-opener to see just how far Nissan pushes the battery use, at least on the low end. There were early reports of Nissan "using all the battery", and although in reality we get only 21 of the 24 kWh, this still is indicative of how far they were willing to go. At least I can appreciate how not going below VLB would be a good thing. But anywhere above is relatively OK.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I'm not sure where to put this, so here's as good as any, since it's where I came across this image.
Credit again goes to TickTock.

It was an eye-opener to see just how far Nissan pushes the battery use, at least on the low end. There were early reports of Nissan "using all the battery", and although in reality we get only 21 of the 24 kWh, this still is indicative of how far they were willing to go. At least I can appreciate how not going below VLB would be a good thing. But anywhere above is relatively OK.

only because you asked; i would put it http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=9539&p=216728#p216728

 

[edatoakrun]

quote="derkraut" I'm a Christian...

Do all LEAFs in heaven, have 12 capacity bars, and an accurate GOM?

And think how fast those lost souls in the fiery pits below, lose capacity bars on their LEAFs.

Maybe even faster than in Phoenix...

 

[DaveEV]

It was an eye-opener to see just how far Nissan pushes the battery use, at least on the low end. There were early reports of Nissan "using all the battery", and although in reality we get only 21 of the 24 kWh, this still is indicative of how far they were willing to go. At least I can appreciate how not going below VLB would be a good thing. But anywhere above is relatively OK.

Keep in mind that ~300V (car dead) is still 3.1V per cell - LiMN cell capacity is typically rated from 4.2V-2.5V so there's still a decent amount left at the bottom. Certainly avoiding going below VLBW seems to be a good idea, though - I certainly would aim to drive as gently as possible once you get to VLBW since internal resistance goes up at very low SOC.

 

[derkraut]

quote="derkraut" I'm a Christian...

Do all LEAFs in heaven, have 12 capacity bars, and an accurate GOM?

And think how fast those lost souls in the fiery pits below, lose capacity bars on their LEAFs.

Maybe even faster than in Phoenix...

In Heaven, we don't need no stinkin' GOM, there won't ever be battery capacity loss; and in Hell, everybody has to drive a Hummer,and refuel it @ $10USA per gallon. :twisted: