When transferring electrical energy from one place to another, there are definitely efficiency gains with higher voltages. Less current is needed to transfer energy at a given power level. You incur less i^2R losses in the wires used to transfer the energy and since this loss is proportional to the square of the current, lower current it better. This is why electrical power companies step up the voltage to 250,000 volts or more before transmission. This enables efficient energy transfer at high power levels over long distances. The voltage then needs to be stepped back down near the point of use. Within an electric vehicle, use of higher voltages allows for the use of thinner wires, resulting in some weight reduction. However, the length of these wires is fairly short (from battery pack output to the motors might be 2 meters?) so the weight reduction / efficiency improvements, are not that great. While charging an EV, use of higher voltages means that the external cable and wiring can be thinner and of lower cost. This is probably the biggest advantage to 800 volt EVs. But as long as we are looking at ~100KWH battery packs and 20-30 minute charge times, 400 volt systems seems to perform very nearly as well as 800 volt systems. This suggests that the limitation is not the power delivery system, but the battery itself. If batteries ever get to where they can charge at 500 KW or beyond, then we will likely need higher voltages. Such high-power charging would be nice, but it may not be worth it if it comes with a high cost. Remember, for day to day use, most EV owners would charge at home or at work. It is really only on long road trips that DC fast charging is an issue. During long road trips, 30 minutes to recharge isn’t prohibitive, but it does mean you’ll likely want to manage your other stops (food and bathroom breaks) to coincide with EV charging stops. Even if we get to the robo-taxi model, 30 minute stops to charge would likely be manageable. Like everything else, faster charging speeds has diminishing marginal returns.
But as I have already pointed out in this video, once we get 150-200 kWh batteries, even a 30 minute stop will be very acceptable. Remember that the car must drive 700-1000 km before it needs its first charging stop. Most people won't even have to recharge during the day because the range is so great. Even today I can't keep up with the fast charging on Model 3 on long trips. So you can only imagine how it would be with even bigger batteries and faster charging. Once you actually experience this first hand, you will understand that 150-200 kWh and 200-225 kW charging is more than enough for personal tranpsportation.
@@bjornnyland the problem is that you cannot charge a 150+ kwh pack on a 400V CCS in less than 30 minutes (let's say 15-80% soc) . The CCS standard has an envelope stopping at 500V, 500A and 150 to 200KW depending on the charger. Once you link this with the limitation of the cell chemistry you simply cannot do it. I message you on Facebook so we can discuss this more in depth if you are interested 🙂
@@CED99 Yes, but this is all low power stuff. 12 Volt power for lights etc. The big power goes to the drive motors and that requires only 3 wires (or cables if you like) from the inverter to each motor. This is where you need to supply up to several hundred amps. Lots of current, but the distance is relatively short at just a few meters or so.
Hi Bjorn, as a battery modelling engineer for an OEM I would be happy to exchange with you to refine your analysis here. I am not saying you're wrong but there are points that can be clarified and would help understand why Porsche and Tesla have different charging curves than Audi and why efficiency should be dissociated from energy consumption. I am happy to help if you want.
Great offer in my view... I think you can contact Bjørn directly through Facebook (messenger) That's what he asked another follower to do the other day (about borrowing a Tesla Model 3 Sr+) I look forward to hear / see the results from your contribution in Bjørns reporting. BR, Per (Denmark)
The voltage for each cell is always around 4 volts. The only difference in a 800 volt based system compared to 400v is the lower current in the charging socket, cables and connectors. Tesla cells throttle earlier because of their cell chemistry. Tesla beefed up the before mentioned EE to support higher current to overcome the 500a ccs2 Standard
About the Nurburgring lap with the Model 3, by the end of the first lap the battery was already overheating and power limited and it's also important to mention he did not push the limits on the car because the brakes were gone after half a lap, so it's not fair to say the 900v didn't make a difference there for the Taycan.
Yea - I was wondering why Bjorn was not taking that into consideration. It was overheating already at the end (which would get worse with better tires and suspension because your driving also changes and you use more power). The Taycan could at least manage a fast lap, what the model 3 with the latest tech couldn`t. I would like to have my EV exactly like tat: Fast charging speeds when I want it and when I have time, I can choose the "eco" mode to give the battery a bit more life. At least you can choose and when you have a busy day with a lot of driving you can use it.
But if you understood the content of this video, you would understand that the reason for the battery to overheat has nothing to do with 400 V or 800 V pack design. And for mass adoption of EVs, track performance without overheating is not important.
@@bjornnyland Well I don't know that, Porsche claims it does, so I tend to trust the engineers behind those decisions. But truth be told, I don't really get how just changing the battery layout means less battery heat.
For model 3 at orange It's slightly reduced power. You can actually drive the crap out of it after the orange and it won't really go into limp for a very long time. Unplugged performance is doing pikes soon. They added huge carbon ceramics and probably reduced Regen which is an adjustable slider on the stock trackmode v2 software. They will likely complete the run with zero issue.
Great video! Thanks for showing actual charging profiles and times to highlight there is about 10% charge time difference between the two systems at this time which is only a few minutes. This in depth analysis is what makes your videos the best electric car channel on the web!
That model 3 on Nürburgring had battery overheated, power was limited at the end. Owner said it himself. Also heat loses are not the same at 400V and 800V, can't beat the physics of I^2xR. Plus you need less copper for lower currents
On the cell level of the battery it doesn't matter, as voltage is defined by the chemical composition anyway. For all other components the higher voltage results in lower losses or smaller cable cross-sections. There's a reason overhead power lines run at hundreds of Kilovolt.
To me the charging load on the battery is the same for 400 or 800v systems if they have the same capacity. 400 have more cells in parallel where the current is distributed. The only thing is that, in 800v systems, you might have less losses in charging equipment like charge station, cable or car dc-dc converter. This might explain the difference in losses.
The charging losses are caused for the most part by joule losses that are not proportional to the power delivered but to the square of the current. This mean that increasing the voltage the overall losses can be effectively reduced. I think that in general this advantage cannot be neglected.
@@SuperSaverio96 but it only applies to bus-bars cables and power electronics, the cells gets the same current if pack is 400V or 800V and I *think* that cells internal resistance loses are the highest
Yea he misinterpreted the videos there, also the taycan has much higher regenerative braking which will heat up the battery more. Also he completely ignored that after less than one round the model 3 started to limit the power due to drive train temperature.
@@asaha7547 you're right, the cell losses are the same on a 400 and 800V system for an identical CRate. As for the cell being a lower part of the losses, it is true but not as much as you might think, but it gets complex because busbar and cables can get hotter than cells (don't really need to en cooled) but then you also get into heat soaking situations where they dump heat into the cells and create hot spots... The art of battery pack design, I hope to be able to share some knowledge with Bjorn so he can then share some with the world :)
800 Volt is the future and that's ok: As you point out, fewer losses and the opportunity to reduce cable diameters = many kilos of copper per car saved. Multiplied by the number of cars produced that's a lot of cost waiting to be cut. CCS plugs are rated for 1000 V already today, so it's an anticipated development. And 800 V (or to be exact: any level between 400 V and 800 V) is fully backwards compatible, so cars using 400 V systems are not penalized. The messy bit is charging an 800 V car on a 400 V DC charger. The Porsche Taycan carries a DC/DC converter (50 kW standard, 150 kW option) for that job. So in the end some Excel spreadsheet balancing all the savings and costs will determine the speed of moving to 800 V systems and I'd say it will not be a super fast transition. Porsche needed the edge over Tesla on charging speed and that was the only way to get it done. This is only about cars of course, buses are already way beyond 400 V (example Scania's city bus runs at 650 V today).
The Tesla battery didn't cook on Nordschleife because the brakes were cooked and the guy had to ease up. You'd need some real performance brakes to properly test the powertrain.
@@abraxastulammo9940 works fine for daily driving, or a couple of flying laps of Laguna Seca even, but as you know, Nordschleife is an entirely different beast.
Same in germany... more than 90% (source: goingelectric.de) EnBW HPC all come with 300 kW 900V, Fastned upgraded to the same HPCs. Allego also uses 900V and 300+ kW.
@@AaronStarkLinux No, not only specs. Real 800V output. It also shows on Stall max-kW for 800V and 400V Cars, to inform driver. support.fastned.nl/hc/de/articles/360037279594-300-kW-Schnelllades%C3%A4ule and support.fastned.nl/hc/de/articles/360039667693-Laden-mit-einem-Porsche-Taycan . Same at EnbW and Allego and many other HPC.
In terms of loading a truck is definitely better to have 800V System. Its the same you, as a European went to USA and want to work there with the 110V current system, you become cracy. It shows, more is always better. Don't start too low into the future, because a change after installing thousends of stations will be very expensive.
6:23 that is very misleading. The Taycan was overhetaing because it did 1000km at 120km/h and was supercharging just before the lap, so the battery was very warm. It even says so in the article you linked. [But two laps into the North Loop endurance track, the Taycan hit trouble, forcing Sentis to admit in the future he should keep to “a simple rule: start with a “cold” battery.”] thedriven.io/2020/08/14/porsche-taycan-battery-overheats-on-nurburgring-north-loop/ And you can't compare it with the Model 3 lap, becuase they weren't driving very hard due to the overheating brakes. And even so, at the end of the lap the battery was overheating.
All good points. But the model 3 is 1/3rd of the price and gets pretty close... Close enough to be more than enough for the majority of road users. The Model 3 and the Taycan will never be in the same league because they are targeted at entirely different markets. Bjorn's point is that the Model 3 is already way beyond what most folks need .. 800v system *may* be over engineering (solving 'problems' that are not really relevant to the majority of users).
@@aidanapword he had good points but you definitely didn't. If you want to compare cars at the same level then use the S as the comparison if your excuse is that the 3 is too cheap. And btw, the model 3 being compared is the top of the line one, is that a third of the price? The S can't even do a lap on the Nürburgring either without overheating, and that's without starting pretty warm already... So any points you thought you had just went up in smoke.
M4XC4V413R4 a purpose built car - for the track, overheats. It doesn’t matter that the battery was warm when started. The Porsche engineers didn’t put that into the equation before they made a production line? The Model S was never designed for the track, but a purpose built family sedan that just happened to go quick. The plaid model S seems to be different, who knows what it can do? The plaid model S, which has already been at the ring, has unofficially beaten the Taycan by a conservative 20 seconds. That’s at 120mph avg speed....for 20 seconds. That’s more than 1/2 mile(~1 km) it was beaten by. Pretty sad I’d say and somewhat disappointed. And I’m a Porsche guy....
Of course speed & charging systems will continue to improve & rightly so. I have recently changed vehicles from an old 30kwh Leaf, to a Kia with a 64kwh battery & max charging speed of only 75kw. Before my purchase this bothered me & l though long & hard about a M3 SR+ due to its higher charging speeds. Now a few months & many long trips later l can honestly say 50kw chargers are fine, l really appreciate the break & if l go to 77% l don't seem to be waiting long after eating & rest room. As you say it's price rather than speed for me.
Very interesting video and it made a lot of sense. 800V seems to be a marketing stunt as well. However, another advantage w 800V could be that the wiring used in the car is thinner, weighs less and takes up less space. Cracking the wiring code for EV can give an edge in mass production. The Porsche Taycan though has a smaller battery and weighs more that the Model S even w those thinner wires 😅
In the Model 3 lap some performance degradation started at the end of the first lap, considering the length of the Nurburgring if the Taycan started to see degradation only after 1.5 lap this represent a significant advantage.
Save Rio - You’re comparing a purpose built sports car with a retail price of ~$240k to a family sedan that costs $60k. A much fairer test would be comparing a Tesla Roadster 2 to a Taycan.
@@TraditionalAnglican This is true for all the dynamic performaces of the car, here we are considery the tecnology behind the battery. If you take in consideration a 130k Model S you will have the same results.
Certainly cable heating will be less if the current is less. The hotter the cable, the more losses you get. But, is it significant? I think you make a good case here that it isnt. The other argument is "Time is money" so faster is better. But again, your point is well made that this is ICE thinking. Fill up, then go for a coffee (or Toilets and then coffee). My experience is that charging the Tesla is just the right amount of time to (do what you need to do and) get a coffee and drink it. Probably makes for a more alert driver and more rewarding driving experience. In other words, faster is not necessarily better. Finally, things will evolve. We need all electric cars to charge up in a reasonable amount of time (15-30 mins) so whatever gets us there.
In my experience from Formula Student on working on Accumulator, the losses inside the accumulator are quite similar for 400V as 800 V. You do get smaller losses outside of the accumulator, but where it made the biggest difference for us were the engines. If a team could afford to make their own engines it was quite beneficial to switch to higher voltages. So when comparing both concepts I wouldn't only consider the battery pack and the cabling, but the motors too. But on the other hand finding a charger for more than 450V, making your own engines and so on are such a pain that it is a big tradeoff.
Any idea of price desparity between 400v and 800v motors and electronics? Rarely anyone mentions that... in rc world, cost is almost exponential with higher volts...
@@DG-uv3zw I have no idea how expensive it is to build one compared to the other. Basically 450V is the standard, and you can't find nearly anything for higher voltages on the market.
Hello Björn, I think you missed two important points in your 800V comparison: 1: Back EMF: Electric motors suffer from an effect called Back-EMF. What it basically does, explained in simple words, is limit the power output of a motor the higher its spinning. Thats why you see EVs accelerate really well from 0-100, but not so much from 150-200. With 800V system, the higher voltage reduces the effect of back EMF and therefore its important to design sports cars like Taycan with 800V. 2: Smaller wires and motor: The same electric motor can theoretically output double the power at 800V than 400V. That means that you will end up with a smaller motor at same output levels, which will make the car lighter. Also the internal wiring can be designed smaller and therefore less heavy.
Great point of view. But your point of view is from the perspective of a vehicle Model 3/Y sized. Vehicle electrification will need to apply all vehicles of all sizes. We are starting to see EV trucks/vans and other commercial vehicles that will be coming available over the next few years. Many of these will have battery packs up to 200KWh. Here 800V charging will be a must. Even for vehicles like the Tesla Cybertruck which will be somewhat disadvantaged if it has a 400V architecture. And if 800V becomes universal might as well take advantage of it on all vehicles.
A friend of me has a Tesla Model 3 Performance, he's charging a bit, slowly, everyday from home. He gets home in the evening after work then just simply plug it in. It costs him just a couple of euros at max. Not so long ago he had to make a "long" trip of more than 600km (just a walk for Bjørn I guess, lol) and had to stop supercharging 20mn. Can't remember how fast he charged, but he leaved to have a coffee while reading the news peacefully for a few minutes...He had to finish it fast after a few minutes because the time that you walk to the place, order your coffee, and install, it's already almost 10mn. I think that Tesla is now fast enough in charging time and has enough range with the long range and performance models, it's getting almost too fast, people just need to plan their trips differently from ICE cars... Can't wait to be on the 22th of september for the #BatteryDay , could be the final step to the electric cars obviousness.
When I starting doing trips (North America) with my LR AWD, 2 years ago, I would at times be waiting a few minutes depending on the stop. And for overall speed of travel I'd hit every just about every SC on route. Then they started tweaking software, opening up the full potential for most SC, upgrading some of the oldest SC (there's still some older gear out there that's limited to 120kW range), and then further modifying the charging curve on my vehicle. Now, even without V3 stations, the car is almost always ready ahead of me and skipping every 2nd SC is about as fast (kind depends on if you have to detour much off route for a given SC). Having gotten used to the prior speeds, it can even be slightly annoying now how fast it is. :) It is really hard to finish a sit-down meal at a busy restaurant before the car's done, even if I set it to say a 95% SOC limit. That's with only 145kW peak (usually I don't see the full 150kW nominal on V2 SC). On the edges there's going to be some people that'll make use of higher speeds, and for very busy SC it'll be good to have throughput that'll reduce/eliminate waiting lines. But outside that we're already "fast enough" before 200kW+ speeds.
Tell that to the vast majority of the city population in my country (Portugal). Hundreds of thousands of people who live in apartments with no garages and still park their cars on the street, buildings with garages with no individual/closed parking spots, that would need dozens of thousands of euros in construction work. The latter is my case. Since doing that would be extremely expensive, a very long job forcing people to leave their cars outside (prone to stealing), and the need to have a majority voting for it, since everyone would have to pay for it, I don't see it happening. Charging the car would have to be as fast and convenient as filling your tank. I am lucky to have a second house where I could charge the car, but I don't go there every week so the range of the car would have to be at least double of what the Model S has. I mean, when have long trips I can do more than 600km at 150Kph in my diesel A5, stop for 2-3 minutes to fill it up and go again. When will an electric car be able to do that?
@@smashingwarden Street changing/public parking (not dedicated to a given person) will definitely be a thing in places. > I mean, when have long trips I can do more than 600km at 150Kph in my diesel A5, stop for 2-3 minutes to fill it up and go again. When will an electric car be able to do that?
Since it is possible to charge at 250 KW with a 400 V system, and 250 KW is fast enough for any automotive application, that proves that 400 V is sufficient. For trucking applications, higher than 250 KW charging rates will be required, necessitating higher voltages. I Don't believe the amount of copper saved in an auto by going to 800 V results cost savings significant enough to overcome its disadvantages. In particular, the need for DC to DC conversion.
"250kw is fast enough for any automotive application" For passenger cars, probably, but in the US, at least, I think we're going to find out with electric pickups and large suvd, which will probably get 2 miles per kwh at highway speeds on a good day, that a 250kw recharge speed, isn't going to be fast enough to convince your average joe to convert to EV, outside gas/diesel going over $6.00 a gallon.
@@thelondonbroiler let's look at that a little more in depth. Assume the pickup has a 150 kWh battery to go 300 miles at 2 miles per kWh. Also assume the larger battery can maintain a 250 kW charge rate up to a 50% SOC. Doing the math, that would allow 150 miles to be added in18 minutes. Seems good enough to me.
@@npbetts1 That's good enough for me too (presently 30 min to get 100 miles in my Bolt). My comment was a prediction of an average Joe in the US. I can already hear average Joe's FUD, "you mean every two hours I have to stop for 18 minutes?" I've given literally over a thousand EV rides to mostly people that had never been in an EV. The pushback to having to stop a little while to charge is illogical but pervasive.
@@thelondonbroiler That is unfortunately true. They fail to see the advantage of charging at home 95% of the time far outweighs the disadvantage of longer stops during the 5% (or less) of the time they are on longer trips.
A truck needs around 130 kW for driving at 90 km/h. After 5 hours it needs a break for 30 Min. In this time it needs 750 kWh. That is a charging speed of 1,5 MW or 800 V @ 1875 A🤷♂️
I've also given this very thing some thought lately. The stations required to make electric class 8 trucks an acceptable replacement for the majority of the industry, would certainly be in there ballpark of what you specified (over a (edit) megawatt).
Heavy vehicles like HGVs and buses will probably move to Hydrogen Fuel Cell technologies just for the ease of refueling. Even if hydrogen is really bad at energy density compared to fossil, the energy density of hydrogen is just much better than current batteries. Siemens is looking into getting HGVs into using a 750V DC overhead line system, not too unlike trolleybuses, but with pantographs instead, more like a train. The HGVs could run at 90-110 km/h and draw all their power from the overhead lines for highway driving, switching to batteries once off the highway and going towards a freight hub. We could be looking at cars and motorcycles completely going to batteries while heavy vehicles move to hydrogen or overhead line solutions.
@@rogerstarkey5390 At that theoretical 1 megawatt charge speed, it's still going to take 40-45 min to get 300 miles of range, and for most trucking, this will be a twice a day occurrence. Demonstration of concept does not equal practicality, as much as I would like it to.
Taycan's cooling system is pretty sophisticated. But also quite space-consuming and weighing quite a lot too. We can clearly see that they wanted to go for performance no matter how and when. Which is good since they are Porsche, a noble german sports car manufacturer with a big history in building fast cars. The 800V architecture is clearly benefiting the entire performance and has the nice side effect of higher charging rate capabilities. However, it is quite astonishing that Model 3 has a similar fast charging in comparison, giving that it relies on a 400V architecture and a much simpler cooling system. All in all I'm really looking forward to what the future holds in the EV Market! It's so fantastic to see the fast progress in technology currently!
I hate the false claims that people make about 800V. It's more of a marketing strategy if anything: 1. 800V is not inherently faster - it is only faster if the main HV path current limit (fuse, contacts, wire gauge, busbar sizing) is the limiting factor. The amount of current going through each cell will be the same, and P = I^2*R, where R is the internal resistance of the cell which causes heating in the battery. While charging at a higher voltage, you only have less losses in the HV path theoretically, but HV path should be sized in order to accommodate less current anyways so the losses should be roughly similar. This is a very small loss compared to the battery. 2. 800V motors are not inherently better. It gets complicated but basically as long as power is the same the size/weight of the motor will be roughly similar, as well as losses. Of course there are other factors to consider here but nothing game-changing 3. There is more part availability/cheaper parts for 400V systems, and stepping up the voltage can introduce unwanted safety/regulation problems in the design process. It's probably worth moving towards just to get that slight edge on your vehicle weight/efficiency, but it really won't make that much of a difference - not nearly as much as everyone says. 4. The main reason the Taycan can do these runs over and over is NOT because of 800V, but because of their battery cell selection as well as the cooling system. This is why the range takes a hit - you either get energy density in the cell or power density. In this case they've gone for a power dense design (less internal resistance = less heating).
How is it that you get the same current in every cell? I’m not saying you are wrong. I just don’t understand it because on one hand, the kWh of the entire pack is the same so you need the same amount of power from the charger and into the cells. However, my logic would be that you are trading current for voltage to get te same power input. An example: Scenario 1: 400V battery charged at 200kW System Voltage: 400V System current: 500A 400*500= 200000w (200kw) Scenario 2: 800V battery charged at the same 200kW System voltage: 800V System current: 250A 800*250= 200000w (200kW) What I see is that you can indeed get lower current values. What am I getting wrong?
There's an important distinction between total pack current and the current through each individual cell. If two (400V & 800V) packs have the same amount of cells and energy, the extra current (in the 400V scenario) is going through the extra cells in parallel.
@@teropiispala2576 Curiosity always gets the better of people. I think people will learn about implementation eventually, just as they have with combustion vehicles. It's just a matter of educating them
MCSGproject Ok, I now see. I had to draw a schematic myself to understand it. So the only thinner wires are the ones that come from the car’s charger input to the main positive an negative of the battery and the cables fin the battery to the motor
Elon has mentioned higher voltage recently. Not in direct relation to charging I believe, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he was referring to it. I do expect Tesla to go to a higher voltage but only when it makes sense. Unlike Porsche where customers will pay anyway, if it makes sense or not.
TroglodyteN a Fan boy because Ionity are too expensive? Even if you have a subscription you have to pay monthly. Most users won’t need (or should use) constant very fast charging due to the damage it causes in the batteries. So either way, you are paying Ionity to use or not use the chargers they provide.
@@xlatjo ionity got subsidies from the state for building their few charge points, Tesla did not, stop whining that you german nation fan boy can not charge at sucs.
"Hey Tesla, can you manage 250kW today?" YES, DAVE, I'M FEELING FINE AND READY TO TAKE A FULL CHARGE "Very good, Tesla, go ahead and drive me to work, then go get yourself a 250kW charge before you start yours." CERTAINLY DAVE. OH, AND DAVE "Yes, Tesla?" THANK YOU FOR ASKING SO NICELY. 😲
Regarding superchargers, BKK is now constructing 6 stalls with 960V chargers in Bergen, at least two of them have 200A CHAdeMO in addition to CCS. They have installed 6 175kW ABB power packs (DC rectifiers). They have the price as Grønn Kontakt, so Ionity gets a run for their money...
Most new 75kW+ chargers support 800V+ systems so there is no need to install 350kW like Ionity to utilize it. It's only Delta that does not support it by default on their HPC. For example all Hyperchargers support up to 1000V, even the 75kW one. And they are not more expensive than the 400V Delta chargers.
Absolutely! Normally you only use HPCs during roadtrips. On my last one, I ALWAYS needed more time to relax/eat/use toilet than the constant 150 kW charging e-tron 🔌 So chill and don‘t grill.
wow! very interesting video, and i sort of kept pace with you. Semi trucks might have an influence on things but there seems no rush to roll out 800V systems. Systems using efficiency over brute force seem better to me so lower V is cool.
Ah, one word on IONITY...my theory...the high price per kWh for non-consortium customers...is.a fend-off price. They want the infrastructure to be available to the customers of the consortium, not for the walk-ins. However, as they grabbed EU money for implementing the infrastructure, they have to be open to everybody - unlike Tesla.
@Wolfgang Preier sorry, I don't get your point. Comparison between SC and IONITY is futile, I reckon they are both cost centers. In case of SC it is only Tesla, in case of IONITY it is the consortium and they will allocate cost to the consortium members. The amount of money asks, the compensation model, soley depends on how much compensation for the cost is desired. If Tesla would compensate SC cost soley by car sales, SC would be free (does that ring a bell?) So, we will see more or less complex compensation models. At the end of the day, the consortium must come up with an offering that can compete with Tesla. Prio one I daresay is availability, reliability and ease of use. To beat Tesla on the latter is allegedly hard. To sustain availability, keeping the charge points available for those who bought a car from the consortium a fend-off price is key. Because they were not shamed enough not to grab the EU money, they HAVE to be open to the public. Tesla did not ask any money - that's probably the only reason why they get away with their closed shop model. Again, comparing price per kWh between SC and IONITY is futile. One thing for sure - in my humble opinion - is: IONITY will not and is not supposed to generate profit directly from selling energy. It's a catalyst to fuel (sic!) car sales. Why would I buy a Tesla (if I could afford one), not only because of the design, the software, efficiency and performance but also because of SC. The reputation of SC is legendary. And IONITY the attempt of a consortium of car makers to keep up with that. Allego 50kW and the like will sell you no e-tron and no Taycan.
@Wolfgang Preier sigh..that's for the balance sheet, right? Somebody will pay their (IONITY's) bill. And yes, they will invoice the members. Does German Law also demand how much profit a company has to make? Hm? At the end of the day, it must be an attractive case for the consortium members. The sole purpose of IONITY is to support consortium car sales. How to turn that into a compliant business model - they will have the proper personnel to work that out.
battery capacity will be bigger in the not so far away future...to keep up with capacity, the charging speed must be adapted. To keep amps and resistance low, voltage needs to go up. Never has math been simpler as with electricity. So, 70-100 kWh is the pinnacle today, and maybe 150kWh in the near future...when the first serious trucks arrive...will they be laid out to charge en route? They will come with huge batteries for sure. So yes, 800V makes sense to me. We will also see what Tesla will have to offer.
Higher capacity doesn't necessarily mean faster charging or discharge speed. You can put a bigger fuel tank in your car and it won't make it any faster.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 That was not my point. People will demand larger batteries to have greater range. To fill the larger battery from 10 to 80 in the same time as the smaller one, guess what you need? Goodness...
@@rogerstarkey5390 interesting info, indeed. Then, there is an on-going discussion wether or not bigger packs will be required or demanded by the customer. However, battery packs have grown bigger by the years. If technology advances enough - and I have a fool's faith in technology - the energy density per kg or volume will increase. If that turns into more capacity or less weight and size is a matter of the desired design. So will there be a "magic boundary" where battery size increase will come to an end? At least in my country, range is the number one counter-argument against e-mobility. And charging speed simply cannot beat range (that is efficiency combined with capacity) if you have to counter "my car needs 5 minutes at the pump". The different thinking required to accept "smart & fast charging" still requires more stop. For me, quite a few stops between start and destination are desired - but not that much by those "iron man diesel drivers". Now it happens that latest entries to the market do not excel with efficiency - being fat and SUV shaped. Adding a bigger battery sure helps to lift the car over the magic boundary where potential buyers would make a purchase. Now - that's my personal belief - people also do not want to accept longer charging time to fill the bigger battery...thus charging speed needs to improve. Again, my personal belief, that's the rationale behind 350kW charging. What Tesla thinks and does is not necessarily what others think & do - or regretfully have to do (by not being Tesla - which are allegedly years ahead of their competitors). But this carries us away from 800V versus 400V - higher voltage or higher amps are required for more power - higher voltage seems to have fewer downsides. Interesting to see if there will be a co-existence of 400V vs 800V or if either one will disappear (like my feeble Type 2 22kW for example, what I'm really afraid of).
@@MacBaerFFM As Bjorn already answered somewhere else, if you had more capacity to begin with (charged at home, overnight) it is likely you wouldn't need to charge so much on the move to reach your destination. Human factors taking care of the rest of the arguments ;-)
About Nurgburgring your facts are wrong. Was expecting better fact checking from you ;) Model 3 had a slowdown/coolldown in the middle of the lap for 30 sec or so, it was not going flat out in the 1st part of the lap (only mini cooper fast), but probably close enough to full performance. In the 2nd part of the lap model 3 was hangiong on to a briskly driven Porsche GT3 RS which is excellent, but it soon overheated the brakes and had to slow down somewhat, at the end of the lap it started to throttle slightly and if it was going for the 2nd lap it would presumebly not get cooler, but continue to overheat even more. Taycan performed considerably better both in terms of brake performance (excellently as all fast Porsches) and battery thermal envelope (over 1 lap at full pace, 7 min something lap).
Hi Bjorn, In 2021 Hyundai as a whole really made a breakthrough with their 800 V integrated charging system: 1∘ traction batteries are now in 800 V string(s) which reduces connectors pins, wiring gauge, and joule losses effects (squared) 2- their SKI battery charging characteristics…
…Have flatter higher amplitude and much flatter lower values Cpeak /Cavg horizontal curves unlike Tesla and other competitors 3- to optimize vehicle weight we can now have less extreme range / recharge time ratios I.e. isn’t a 10-80% for a full 500 km range recharge in 18 minutes better than a hypothetical heavier 1000 km battery in one hour meaning 2 times 18 minutes vs a single 60 minute recharge? Also Hyundai has a patented trick that directly accepts 400 V chargers (
I think the main advantage at some point in the future will be that the charging cable and connector can more easily keep up with the amount of Power. If you have a 150kWh battery pack and want to charge it with the same overall C rating on the charge cycle. Than the amount of Amps on a 400V flex cable will become a bit crazy.
People forget that the primary reason for 800 V is for charging, not necessarily for operating efficiencies. Yes, the CCS standard is limited to 500 A; however, that is a sustained 500 A. Huber + Suhner recently released a CCS cable capable of providing 500 A for sustained periods, even in hot temperatures. www.hubersuhner.com/en/products/low-and-high-voltage/cable-systems/high-power-charging-systems/radox-hpc500 Tesla's proprietary charging standard does supply more current, which enables the Model 3 to charge at 250 kW versus the Porsche Taycan's 270 kW peak. However, Tesla's charging equipment might not pass independent certification safety standards (such as UL). It's apparent that Tesla is pushing their equipment beyond the limits of what would be considered safe (something an open, public charging standard couldn't do), so the 800 V (technically 950 V on the charger side) is the best workaround for that limited current. This also might be why the Model 3 can only accept 250 kW for about 15 minutes (typically the cutoff point for sustained 100% loads). One other consideration is that batteries are getting bigger. The upcoming GMC Hummer EV will have up to a 200 kWh battery, so even charging at a sustained 400 kW would only be a 2 C charging rate. Far lower than both the Model 3 and the Taycan.
Early peak charging speed vs. long flat curve is for convenience & charger usage optimization. Some portion of charging session only need a quick add of 30% to 40% SOC - having early peak gets this job done faster, and allows more users / charging stall. However - a more modest (& extended) early peak would be a good compromise. Note that electrical / thermal rating (how much heat for how long) is anyway always trading off peak vs. sustained - so short & high peaks don't necessarily add much equipment cost (thermal limits) vs. medium/sustained peaks. Grid connection cost would be higher however.
i think 800v is that as charging powers rise, low voltage demands bigger cables for the amperage. you can only go so high before the cable becomes unweildly on a 400v system.
Regarding Supercharger V3: No one seems to see the bigger picture here. On the type label of a V3 is written 1000V DC and 425 Ampere. V2 has 410V. All current Tesla Vehicles have only 404V max. Voltage! You think what I think? Currently there is a big Rollout in Europe of V3 Superchargers (Like there was a Rollout of CCS Cabels in Europe before the first Model 3 deliveries! Which only have CCS in Europe) In one month there is Batteryday as everyone knows 😉 I predict the new Drivetrain/Battery will have at least a 800V to 1000V backbone. Wait there is more: To charge a Model 3 with 250KW and 404V max. there are 618Ampere needed. I guess the V3 type label underreports like the ones on V2 (410V 270A is only 110KW but they provide 150KW) So a V3 Supercharger should be able to provide at least 618KW!!! Newer Tesla Vehicles with Drivetrain of Batteryday should be able to charge extremly fast! Keep in mind - Elons said about the planed 350KW Taycan charging speed something like: What is this? A mere kids toy? No one speaks about that! Why? 😉
@Wolfgang Preier Yes for sure. Potential 800V+ will be only for top end Models like Model S Plaid or so. I guess also Model 3/Y will stay on present 400V for the next time.
@@baldurornoskarsson1204 So even more potential! 😁 I know I wrote only a baseline with my quick and dirty calculation at max voltage. But even that is unbeliveable!
Having a 800V or 1200V battery pack rather than 400V is far more dangerous than needing more amps for charging. Charging cables can be cooled down with coolant. And connectors and cables have sensor to sense temp in case of overheating.
@Art Uro it does matter a lot. It has to do with isolation, chances of archs,relays, begin able shut it off in case of fire, and many other things that are long to explain. Not saying 400 is "low" and those risks er eliminated, but at 800 or 1200 they are even more pronounced. And there are some benefits with higher voltage also.
@Art Uronevermind. Does look you are stuck in your thoughts. Its not about you touching the terminals. They have no voltage anyway until the connector is connected and the handshake is done. There are other factors to be considered, where the voltage makes difference.
@Art Uro No. There is huge difference! AC is much more deadly than DC. 400 VDC can kill, but if connection is not perfect it will not kill. (Leak after accident ...) 800 VDC is much more than twice as dangerous.
@Art Uro Depends what you want. 1V will certainly not kill me. Current CPUs and GPUs use about 1V and up to ~200 W (or more). For cars 400 VDC is very good compromise between safety and efficiency. Only advantage 800 V has is less metal in cables. Insulation has to be thicker for same safety, so cables are not thinner. In cars distances are short, so there is no need for 800 V. I would absolutely choose 400 V instead of 800 V. 800 V is only marketing gimmick. Claims of faster charging speed are complete bullshit. Charging speed is limited by cell (about 4 V).
Never mind the voltage, it s the charging C rate at cell level that counts. But having higher voltage system help everywhere else except the motor. Double Volt = half Amperes. For the motor, it change practicly nothing. 100v 10A is the same motor as 100A 10V. It the connectors and components this help.
Motor heat for EV is also a big problem. Especially for a motor with permanent magnets. Even on Audi E-Tron SUV and Sportback both rotor and stator is liquid cooled. Beside motor also waste heat in inverter must be cooled. When you have higher voltage you have much less waste heat.
Bjorn, I know you may know that already .. with higher voltage you can run lass amps and also reduce the wire gauge .. so I think it’s more like no one setup a good use case for 800v or higher just yet plan design battery that can support it .. anyways all that truly does not matter because, Tesla needs to copy Audi 55 charging profile and charge deep into the pack vs just a few min at 250 .. run that deep into the pack like up to 80% for the win .. right now even at 150k peak that is run deep into the pack wins..
Better to have and not need than need and not have. If it fast charges at a lower speed more of the time but you rarely need that max charge speed, at least you have the option at 800v
You didn't watch that model 3 on the Nürburgring, did you? It did overheat before even finishing the first lap, the guy just stopped pushing it to the max to cool it off, he was already getting power limited just above half a lap in.
Of course I watched it. The problem for them was shitty stock brakes. But even if the color on the battery went from green to orange, it doesn't mean that you're out of power. It can still deliver decent punch. And it goes back to green quick again if it can rest a bit.
I would like to adjust the supercharger speed. A visit to the WC and order some food and... charge is complete just when you get the food and have to move the car! Shiiiiet!
Yeah, it's kinda funny how that works. People used to the gas paradigm swear charging is too slow, but when you've shifted into the EV paradigm, it can actually be too fast, since you're typically doing "things" while charging. I wouldn't have believed it, if I didn't experience it a few times.
Also, the additional component cost of 800V systems => expensive repairs down the road. Plus the additional weight of the step-up converter. I 100% agree with everything you have said. Porsche have backed a looser on this one and made their car uncompetitive. Tesla has another truck up it’s sleeve for higher peak currents.... Super Capacitors, likely mounted on the motors which could double as strong brakes, perhaps solid state brakes?
You're right. But the future is 800V because Porsche/Vag/Ionity needed to do something "different", and they pushed for this change. Even if it was not the best value-price option. People didnt need 800V, but Porsche/others did. Its an unjustified change.
Thank you Ionity for moving CCS charging forward; providing charging for both class 400 V and 800 V cars. Trucks and buses usually are 700 V battery and motors. They also use CCS chargers with 800 V. Ionity do not yet do charging bays that makes it easy to charge trucks, but FastNed do.
@@foersom5928 Ionity is a bluff. They stealed 39 million euros of public funds to make expensive superchargers for Taycans and for Germans and countries within the neigborhood. Also, 0,79€? Thieves and robbers. Ionity is the greates threat to electric mobility. Ionity is the worst ever and I will use any other charging alternative at all costs. Ionity delenda est.
More than 400 V systems only make sense for larger vehicles, since you can use smaller cables. So 10 kV for charging semis for example would make sense - like tested in Germany currently with overhead wires. While the voltage running from the battery to the motor is a completely different busissness. Maybe 800 V is fine for that, or even 400 V, since the cable ways are pretty short.
Renault also went backwards for some years. In the beginning you was able to charge the Zoe with 43 kW and then they developed their own Renault motor, which can only charge with 22 kW. Just some years later, they higher the charging power again with CCS DC charging. But it’s not really that much faster than the 43 kW AC charger. Because the input power at the battery is not 50 kW, even the charger provides 50 kW
ZE50 actually charges way faster than the old Q-variants with 43 kW. You forget the poor 80 % efficiency in the chameleon chargers. So when the plug delivers 43 kW, you're only getting 34 kW into the battery. ZE50 can get 45 kW into the battery. Big difference.
The Model 3 on Mischa's Nurburgring Lap DID overheat a bit towards the end, and that was without being pushed to 100% (due to the brakes fading earlier). However, probably not strictly voltage related.
400 V (actually up to 500 V) is fine for most consumer cars now and at least 10 years into the future. 800 V will be used for performance cars and cars with large batteries. 800 V CCS chargers are also needed for trucks and buses, they usually use 700 V battery and motors so they can not be charged on 400 V chargers.
Its one reason I feel the highest power superchargers are few and far between. If Tesla knows it degrades battery faster, you announce the quicker charger but then limit the overall deployment.
I agree with you on the 800V topic, it might have some advantages, but it also has some problems that come with it. (Including some legal hurdles... 400V is after all a "houshold standard"...) I do not agree on the 250KW though. With increasing battery sizes (which will also come with increasing numbers of individual cells) you can push more power into the system in parallel, without straining the individual cell more than you would do today. Do we actually need that? I don't know. But being able to charge 500 km of range in 5 minutes or less would take the last argument away from patrol cars...
That's exactly what I have been talking about in this video and the other one 2 years ago. People who *think* they need to recharge in 5 minutes have never owned a fast charging EV like Taycan, Model 3 or e-tron before. They have a fossil mindset.
@@bjornnyland I own a Model S, so I have some experience with it by now too. If you live in a situation where you can't charge at home the charging time becomes a struggle in some situations. My next "useful" charger is about 15 minutes walk away from my home, and it has an output of 11KW, so I have to leave the car there if I use it. In most cases I can avoid taking that trip and charge whenever I stop somewhere where I have a destination charging opportunity. But in those cases where I can't (e.g. next weekend I have four trips planned in rather short succession and no destination charging in any of those locations) this becomes a hassle. I will manage for sure, but not without loosing time that I would never loose in a petrol car. (And to make matters worse, on the trip next weekend I don't even have a supercharger anywhere on the way...) It's a corner case, sure, but it's nonetheless reality.
It really all comes down to how much current you can safely and reliably pass through the connectors between the car and its charger. It's trivial and relatively cheap to increase the size of the conductors inside of a car to accommodate the higher currents associated with a lower voltage supply. (As we've already seen with the Model 3 and Y). The stumbling block is when trying to fast charge. Connectors tend to degrade when in the elements, and also whenever they're mated and taken apart. Any imperfections in the mating surfaces will cause extra heating in the connections. We've already seen that Tesla's connectors can handle the ~650 amps being plowed through them. But with larger capacity batteries coming in the new Roadster and Cybertruck, maintaining a relatively fast charge will require amperages to roughly double. Again, this won't be a huge deal for the cabling of the charger or car, but the connectors will need to be *very* robust to reliably handle this current without overheating, or you'll just have to deal with getting "only" 250 KW. 😁 I'd wager, 400V will be the standard for the vast majority of passenger cars, while 800V will probably be the standard for larger vehicles with >100KWH capacity such as light duty trucks, vans, etc.
@@harmhoeks5996 for 800V nominal voltage you need about 216 Lithium Battery Cells of 3.7V in Series. If one of these cells goes bad, then it gets a high internal resistance and you have a bad battery. The BMS might be albe to handle that, but I kind of doubt it. I'm pretty sure you can't full measure and monitor 216 independent cells, detect bad ones and somehow bypass them individually. Bad engineering is the downside.
Yes, it is for cars. It adds complexity and cost to the car and DC charging equipment. For truck and race car applications with a constant high power demand and large batteries, 800V is the way to go.
The reason for a higher temperature in the taycan on track is because of its regeneration. It is 3 times as high as the teslas. So think like that it has never a Pause no second. It ist like discharging and hpc charging in a 20second interval.
it always depends on the requirement porsche has released its first (new age) electric car so i think the roadmap will show what it will bring. when the battery gets bigger a higher voltage (800v) makes sense specially for trucks, busses. for smaller cars like L7e you could use even a 48v board system where the charging is with 230v or 11kw loader.
i think you missed that the taycan recuperates/regenerates at 260 kW during braking, in parallel with the physical brakes, so its none stop stress on the battery during its lap. isnt the model 3 either braking or regenerating (at 'only' 60 kW), but not both simultaneously? the model 3 also ran into temperature issues with its battery. i also think i remember you doing an acceleration, but not a full deceleration during your model 3 test on the autobahn, so the car could cool whenever you reached 200 km/h.
Regen on Model 3 is normally at 70 kW. In Track Mode it's at 95 kW. But my example shows that 800 V isn't really a dealbraker if you want track performance.
Bjorn, you are getting there :-) 800VDC charging can allow cheaper and thinner cables from the charging socket to the battery, saving money to Porsche. The stress on the cells are exactly the same. When comparing to M3, 250kW peak charging on a 74kWh battery is much much higher than 270kW on a 87kWh of the Taycan, although Porsche allowing it to last longer. In your tests, it seems that the charging speeds in terms of percentage are almost identical. 3-phase 220V is has a very natural and efficient conversion to 400VDC, therefore making much more sense. Main advantage of 800V is at the high RPM, there is a back-EMF that reduces the effective voltage applied on the engine. The future is with cells to pack, where the effective pack voltage will dynamically change based on SoC and power demands and further increase EV efficiency.
Someone needs to explain why higher voltage equals thinner cables. If I wanted higher water flow I wouldn't use a thinner hosepipe. I'm ready when you are.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 the conductive part of a cable is rated for a specific current - not voltage. You can think about it as a pipe is rated for a maximum current, and a voltage is a height difference that provides the water a potential energy that can deal with more resistance. The downside of it is if your regular needs are for low current, you may end up wasting energy on resistance for your normal needs.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 Power = Voltage × Current Or W = V × A So, for a constant power, a lower voltage system needs to provide more Current than a higher voltage system For example, for you can get 250kW with 400V × 625A or 800V × 312.5A Lower the current, lower is the heating Lower the heating, thinner will be the wire Talking you water and pipe analogy, think of the quantity of water obtained per unit time be the power (kW), the pressure of the water as voltage (V) and the radius of the pipe be (A) To get a constant water supply, you can use high pressure water in a small pipe or low pressure water in a large pipe
In the USA, the *Mains* *Voltage* in most residential units is 120v / 240v AC Split-Phase and 208v/120v or 480v/277v or 600v/347v 3-Phase for commercial / industrial but the voltage used for the Power Transmission *GRID* is much, much higher ... in the 1,000's of volts AC & DC ...
I once owned an electric car, and many moons will pass before I fork out for a new one. They suck. My current ride is a Suzuki Ignis 4WD, 2001 ;-) ,and I can putt from Særp to Steinkjær without worries. It almost dont use fuel, has a lousy radio, but lots of knobs to control things like heating and lights. Its a small, blue friend!
An interesting topic, and some informative discussion afterwards. Yay ! I agree that 200 kW, 2C charging is a sweet spot now and it will be so for a good long while until cell chemistry advances a lot. So how much energy can be saved in an 800V system compared to a 400V system, and at what cost ? The numbers seem to favor closer to 400V than 800V although there are a group of E. Asian manufacturers who seem to be congregating around 450 - 500V nominal pack voltage.
Bjorn, the Taycan was fast charged right before the ring, so the battery was heat soaked when they started, that's why it overheated at 1.5 Laps. Also, both Model 3 and Taycan finished one lap. I want to see what happens with a Taycan that starts properly cooled down, and a Model 3 that starts properly cooled down.
I expect the potential for the 800V over 400V standard is more about where battery tech may be in a couple major generations into the future (so maybe 5+ years out, maybe more like 10 years or more). When batteries become capable of taking on charge multiples faster than current tech. Of course the current CCS standard current allowed will be a chokepoint on that then, too. So maybe going 800V now won't really buy much in the future, as we'll need large-scale gear upgrades anyway?
I’m not sure 800V is that important today. Might be once we get to the 200kWh battery packs for the pickup trucks though. Charging speed becomes more important when towing.
Roger Starkey Why not having 200kWh batteries if batteries are getting cheaper every year. I can only imagine an ev having that huge battery doing the 1000km challenge without even charging. Also with such a big battery, c-rate are lower, you cycle less the battery, you demand less from it: less battery degradation
There is a big and well established industry support for 408V. Testing quipment, cabling, fuses, isolation boxes, you name it. Even your average cooking plate uses those components. 800V is nomansland, grid (with quite expensive components) starting at 5-6kV. No reason for reinventing the wheel here, there are enough other hurdles to overcome.
Higher the voltage higher the efficency in cabling and inverter electronic. Check CREE MosFET or IGBT transistors to understand, for example. I think 1200v would be future actually!
Only the future will tell. I think I have presented my idea before, but if you can rearrange the battery just for charging I guess if you support 150kW 400V you can support 300kW with 800V just by making at 800-pack during charging. This can be done independently on the pack being 800 or 400 so if Taycan had this it could do that to charge easier on
The only difference is cable thickness, and copper busbar size. For 250kw on 400V, you will need bigger and heavier and more expensive busbars and cabling than 250kw on 800v. The losses are exactly the same, unless you use the heavier cabling/busbars from the 400v system on the 800v architecture. The weight and cost advantage of the 800v system with smaller cables and busbars is mostly offset by needing a on board dc-dc converter for use on 400v chargers. If bigger battery's are getting more common, and the charger cables will still need to be handled by one person when charging 500kw, you have one advantage there with 800v
I think most points you mentioned are the view of present time. The potential of 800V is great, because you don't need thick cables and high curent devices, lower Amps are in general much more easy to handle and on car side simply cheaper... the need of cooling is less, so even in lower class cars and in lower classified batteries you get most of it. Of course it takes a few years to build this infrastructure, but I think the 800V charging-stations will be in future more and more cheaper and on long term lower Amps are very welcome by manufactors to drop their costs. Maybe also for that reason the joint venture of manufactors are pushing 800V with Ionity...
I honestly think 800V is the future. Think about a (future?) battery with ultra-low resistance - it can charge faster, so pump up the juice. Waiting to hear the full specs on the Lucid EV - which is 800V and seems to have some crazy specs already! If Cybertruck (as an example) was 800V - could I not just occupy two 400V chargers - each charging half the battery? Perhaps the Tesla V3 chargers are 800V ready?
Once people move over to EVs, more and more fast chargers will pop up in that country. Just look at Norway's impressive charging network. And as pointed out way too many times in this channel; you don't need to recharge too fast as long as you have large enough batteries.
The thing with EVs, is you can typically charge where you park. More homes, more businesses, more groceries, more activity centers, more garages etc. will provide charging, especially in places where it attracts customers to shop/dine. Faster charging may be nice, but EVs really shouldn't be looked at through the lenses of gas cars.
Having carried out surveys of the time taken at various ICE filling stations in the UK the average was between 8 - 10 minutes, which included paying time, probably buying some snacks, etc. The main difference with EV’s is the majority of people will charge at home something most people can’t do with an ICE vehicle. There will be some living in places without parking that can’t do this but they may be able to still charge at work. This means you don’t need as many charging stations as fuel pumps but you do need many more than we currently have in the UK. There is still a lot of misinformation on charging station numbers in the UK, the apps show those at dealerships, which are not actually available to most people plus lots of 7.5kw chargers that are useless when on a long distance drive. This makes the map full of chargers but actually there are very few, especially outside cities.
Bjorn good thinking, as batteries get better bigger lighter the need for 800v may disappear and to be honest now batteries are over the 400 miles range and if they keep getting better and better home charging at 6 to 8 hrs will just be all we need and the batteries will last for ever, whos gonna do 400, 450, 500 miles every day!........lets see Tesla Battery day my be the death of 800v
Very interesting video Bjorn. I looked at the V3 specs and they support 1000v and ~425A. Do you think Cybertruck or Roadster 2020 will support 800V systems because of that?
This might be BS but in my experience it's always better to go with what makes life easier in future. It would be a pain in the a* once battery systems can handle 800V better but you installed 400V chargers everywhere.
So if you are at a 500amp ccs dcfc why doesn't the Taycan charge at 500kw? I understand that it's software that it charges around 270kw but why does Porsche limit the Taycan as if it was on a 350amp charger and not take advantage of the 500amp current?
800V is supposed to have a lot more advantages then just charging speed. I'm hoping that Sandy Monro does a teardown on the Lucid Air which is a 900V system and like Tesla, and unlike Porsche, is both effecient as well as high performance. Will the Lucid be significantly more effecient than Tesla because of their higher voltage or is their range advantage due mostly to a bigger battery?
"supposed" is the keyword here. When I drove Taycan, I wasn't thinking: "Oh, this 800 V system is awesome." The car felt and drove just like a 400 V car.
These Delta chargers are not that common in other countries. They are popular in Norway with Grønn Kontakt and BKK. You can also find more of them in Switzerland, Greenway in Poland and Slovakia also uses them. Most other operators are using Alpitronic Hypercharger, ABB HPC, Efacec or EVBox and they all support 920 or even 1000V. There are even some 50 kW chargers from ABB which supports 920V (ABB Terra 54 HV).
How is 800v supplied? Is it being stepped-up at the station? I thought ~400v 3-phase was the maximum you could get on a european grid? If being stepped-up, this will have (heat) losses that need to be considered.
Normally it's 400V. But the voltage in the high power lines is significantly higher and since the charging stations need much power, they are probably connected to a 10000 or 20000V line. So it is possible to step it down to 800V.
Ooh, no. The UK railway overhead power lines are 25,000 volts. Have a word with the energy supplier and they'll happily build you a 100,000 volt power supply. For a small fee.
It will be mostly a matter of costs for which system will win. With 800V you would need thinner cables and therefore I would expect lower costs for that. But if costs are increasing with either total power output than the thinner cables might not compensate for that increased power. Or if the support of two voltage systems are increasing costs at the charging stations than this might be also a no-go. Porsche doesn't need to care about costs at the end users. But EVs are becoming more and more a mass market product then prices will matter a lot. On the other hand I think that the 800V system hasn't reached its limits with what Porsche has done so far. So there is probably still room for improvement (maybe less so with the CCS system). And probably most people still agree (and that is still the biggest hurdle for EV haters) that reducing the charging time further from 20min down is still on top of our wish list.
From the perspective of a charging station capacity it is also better to have cars charge at higher rates (= more cars per hour). But for the driver, under a certain charging time there is no added benefit.
That is only true if Taycan uses 20" and 21" wheels. In my recent test with 19" wheels, Taycan has higher km/h charging speed than Model 3. But how many Taycans will be fitted with 19" wheels? Almost none :P
I agree with Bjørn that the benefits of 800 V vs. 400 V are little, but nevertheless I think it more and more car makers will switch to 800 V or even more. 800 V has the potential to make cars cheaper, 400 V is just cheaper now, because it is already more widely available.
![Kodak Black - Catch Fire [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A4ch-olIuZo/mqdefault.jpg)
When transferring electrical energy from one place to another, there are definitely efficiency gains with higher voltages. Less current is needed to transfer energy at a given power level. You incur less i^2R losses in the wires used to transfer the energy and since this loss is proportional to the square of the current, lower current it better. This is why electrical power companies step up the voltage to 250,000 volts or more before transmission. This enables efficient energy transfer at high power levels over long distances. The voltage then needs to be stepped back down near the point of use.
Within an electric vehicle, use of higher voltages allows for the use of thinner wires, resulting in some weight reduction. However, the length of these wires is fairly short (from battery pack output to the motors might be 2 meters?) so the weight reduction / efficiency improvements, are not that great. While charging an EV, use of higher voltages means that the external cable and wiring can be thinner and of lower cost. This is probably the biggest advantage to 800 volt EVs. But as long as we are looking at ~100KWH battery packs and 20-30 minute charge times, 400 volt systems seems to perform very nearly as well as 800 volt systems. This suggests that the limitation is not the power delivery system, but the battery itself. If batteries ever get to where they can charge at 500 KW or beyond, then we will likely need higher voltages. Such high-power charging would be nice, but it may not be worth it if it comes with a high cost. Remember, for day to day use, most EV owners would charge at home or at work. It is really only on long road trips that DC fast charging is an issue. During long road trips, 30 minutes to recharge isn’t prohibitive, but it does mean you’ll likely want to manage your other stops (food and bathroom breaks) to coincide with EV charging stops. Even if we get to the robo-taxi model, 30 minute stops to charge would likely be manageable. Like everything else, faster charging speeds has diminishing marginal returns.
There is 1.5km of wire in a Model 3... though only 100m in a Model Y according to Sandy Munro
But as I have already pointed out in this video, once we get 150-200 kWh batteries, even a 30 minute stop will be very acceptable. Remember that the car must drive 700-1000 km before it needs its first charging stop. Most people won't even have to recharge during the day because the range is so great.
Even today I can't keep up with the fast charging on Model 3 on long trips. So you can only imagine how it would be with even bigger batteries and faster charging. Once you actually experience this first hand, you will understand that 150-200 kWh and 200-225 kW charging is more than enough for personal tranpsportation.
It all has to step down to cell level voltage eventually. Less loss at 800V supply, but offset by step down.
@@bjornnyland the problem is that you cannot charge a 150+ kwh pack on a 400V CCS in less than 30 minutes (let's say 15-80% soc) . The CCS standard has an envelope stopping at 500V, 500A and 150 to 200KW depending on the charger. Once you link this with the limitation of the cell chemistry you simply cannot do it. I message you on Facebook so we can discuss this more in depth if you are interested 🙂
@@CED99 Yes, but this is all low power stuff. 12 Volt power for lights etc. The big power goes to the drive motors and that requires only 3 wires (or cables if you like) from the inverter to each motor. This is where you need to supply up to several hundred amps. Lots of current, but the distance is relatively short at just a few meters or so.
Hi Bjorn, as a battery modelling engineer for an OEM I would be happy to exchange with you to refine your analysis here. I am not saying you're wrong but there are points that can be clarified and would help understand why Porsche and Tesla have different charging curves than Audi and why efficiency should be dissociated from energy consumption. I am happy to help if you want.
Well, if you have time I would gladly want to learn more and ask some questions? Probably lots of people following this channel also...
You model batteries? You pose in your boxer shorts holding a battery and wink at the camera? My wife wants to know more ☺
Great offer in my view... I think you can contact Bjørn directly through Facebook (messenger) That's what he asked another follower to do the other day (about borrowing a Tesla Model 3 Sr+) I look forward to hear / see the results from your contribution in Bjørns reporting. BR, Per (Denmark)
The voltage for each cell is always around 4 volts. The only difference in a 800 volt based system compared to 400v is the lower current in the charging socket, cables and connectors. Tesla cells throttle earlier because of their cell chemistry. Tesla beefed up the before mentioned EE to support higher current to overcome the 500a ccs2 Standard
@@Nickbaldeagle02 Haha, good one! Don't forget I'm an engineer so I only cover myself with calculators and rulers while doing it 😊
About the Nurburgring lap with the Model 3, by the end of the first lap the battery was already overheating and power limited and it's also important to mention he did not push the limits on the car because the brakes were gone after half a lap, so it's not fair to say the 900v didn't make a difference there for the Taycan.
Yea - I was wondering why Bjorn was not taking that into consideration. It was overheating already at the end (which would get worse with better tires and suspension because your driving also changes and you use more power). The Taycan could at least manage a fast lap, what the model 3 with the latest tech couldn`t. I would like to have my EV exactly like tat: Fast charging speeds when I want it and when I have time, I can choose the "eco" mode to give the battery a bit more life. At least you can choose and when you have a busy day with a lot of driving you can use it.
But if you understood the content of this video, you would understand that the reason for the battery to overheat has nothing to do with 400 V or 800 V pack design. And for mass adoption of EVs, track performance without overheating is not important.
@@bjornnyland Well I don't know that, Porsche claims it does, so I tend to trust the engineers behind those decisions.
But truth be told, I don't really get how just changing the battery layout means less battery heat.
For model 3 at orange It's slightly reduced power. You can actually drive the crap out of it after the orange and it won't really go into limp for a very long time. Unplugged performance is doing pikes soon. They added huge carbon ceramics and probably reduced Regen which is an adjustable slider on the stock trackmode v2 software. They will likely complete the run with zero issue.
Great video! Thanks for showing actual charging profiles and times to highlight there is about 10% charge time difference between the two systems at this time which is only a few minutes. This in depth analysis is what makes your videos the best electric car channel on the web!
That model 3 on Nürburgring had battery overheated, power was limited at the end. Owner said it himself.
Also heat loses are not the same at 400V and 800V, can't beat the physics of I^2xR.
Plus you need less copper for lower currents
On the cell level of the battery it doesn't matter, as voltage is defined by the chemical composition anyway.
For all other components the higher voltage results in lower losses or smaller cable cross-sections.
There's a reason overhead power lines run at hundreds of Kilovolt.
@@wermagst Exactly
To me the charging load on the battery is the same for 400 or 800v systems if they have the same capacity.
400 have more cells in parallel where the current is distributed.
The only thing is that, in 800v systems, you might have less losses in charging equipment like charge station, cable or car dc-dc converter.
This might explain the difference in losses.
That's exactly how it is 👍🏻.
The charging losses are caused for the most part by joule losses that are not proportional to the power delivered but to the square of the current. This mean that increasing the voltage the overall losses can be effectively reduced. I think that in general this advantage cannot be neglected.
@@SuperSaverio96 but it only applies to bus-bars cables and power electronics, the cells gets the same current if pack is 400V or 800V and I *think* that cells internal resistance loses are the highest
Yea he misinterpreted the videos there, also the taycan has much higher regenerative braking which will heat up the battery more.
Also he completely ignored that after less than one round the model 3 started to limit the power due to drive train temperature.
@@asaha7547 you're right, the cell losses are the same on a 400 and 800V system for an identical CRate. As for the cell being a lower part of the losses, it is true but not as much as you might think, but it gets complex because busbar and cables can get hotter than cells (don't really need to en cooled) but then you also get into heat soaking situations where they dump heat into the cells and create hot spots... The art of battery pack design, I hope to be able to share some knowledge with Bjorn so he can then share some with the world :)
800 Volt is the future and that's ok: As you point out, fewer losses and the opportunity to reduce cable diameters = many kilos of copper per car saved. Multiplied by the number of cars produced that's a lot of cost waiting to be cut. CCS plugs are rated for 1000 V already today, so it's an anticipated development. And 800 V (or to be exact: any level between 400 V and 800 V) is fully backwards compatible, so cars using 400 V systems are not penalized. The messy bit is charging an 800 V car on a 400 V DC charger. The Porsche Taycan carries a DC/DC converter (50 kW standard, 150 kW option) for that job. So in the end some Excel spreadsheet balancing all the savings and costs will determine the speed of moving to 800 V systems and I'd say it will not be a super fast transition. Porsche needed the edge over Tesla on charging speed and that was the only way to get it done. This is only about cars of course, buses are already way beyond 400 V (example Scania's city bus runs at 650 V today).
The Tesla battery didn't cook on Nordschleife because the brakes were cooked and the guy had to ease up. You'd need some real performance brakes to properly test the powertrain.
@@abraxastulammo9940 works fine for daily driving, or a couple of flying laps of Laguna Seca even, but as you know, Nordschleife is an entirely different beast.
Yes ease up, following Porsche GT3, but i think your argument will be porsche was driven by bad driver, am i right ?
@@TschingisTube no, he slowed down because the Tesla performance brakes are not real racing brakes.
@@MrGonzonator so the Porsche GT3, left him ?
@@TschingisTube why do you keep on bringing up the Porsche? I thought we were talking about the Model 3 power train?
Almost all CCS chargers over 50kW in Switzerland are already 800V.
And even the new 20kW DC chargers installed in some shopping malls are 800V! (ABB Terra DC Wallbox) We're ready for whatever happens :)
Frankly, it doesn't prove anything. Your local charging operator might have made an investment, that wouldn't pay off.
Same in germany... more than 90% (source: goingelectric.de) EnBW HPC all come with 300 kW 900V, Fastned upgraded to the same HPCs. Allego also uses 900V and 300+ kW.
Maybe you saw 800V in the specs, but the charger it's working at 400V anyways.
@@AaronStarkLinux No, not only specs. Real 800V output. It also shows on Stall max-kW for 800V and 400V Cars, to inform driver. support.fastned.nl/hc/de/articles/360037279594-300-kW-Schnelllades%C3%A4ule and support.fastned.nl/hc/de/articles/360039667693-Laden-mit-einem-Porsche-Taycan . Same at EnbW and Allego and many other HPC.
In terms of loading a truck is definitely better to have 800V System.
Its the same you, as a European went to USA and want to work there with the 110V current system, you become cracy. It shows, more is always better. Don't start too low into the future, because a change after installing thousends of stations will be very expensive.
Yeah, 400V seems a reasonable sweet spot for the average personal vehicle, but for larger commercial vehicles higher voltages will be beneficial.
North America is 240v service.
6:23 that is very misleading. The Taycan was overhetaing because it did 1000km at 120km/h and was supercharging just before the lap, so the battery was very warm. It even says so in the article you linked.
[But two laps into the North Loop endurance track, the Taycan hit trouble, forcing Sentis to admit in the future he should keep to “a simple rule: start with a “cold” battery.”]
thedriven.io/2020/08/14/porsche-taycan-battery-overheats-on-nurburgring-north-loop/
And you can't compare it with the Model 3 lap, becuase they weren't driving very hard due to the overheating brakes. And even so, at the end of the lap the battery was overheating.
All good points. But the model 3 is 1/3rd of the price and gets pretty close... Close enough to be more than enough for the majority of road users.
The Model 3 and the Taycan will never be in the same league because they are targeted at entirely different markets.
Bjorn's point is that the Model 3 is already way beyond what most folks need
.. 800v system *may* be over engineering (solving 'problems' that are not really relevant to the majority of users).
So.. buy a car with a combustion engine?... 😅
@@aidanapword he had good points but you definitely didn't. If you want to compare cars at the same level then use the S as the comparison if your excuse is that the 3 is too cheap. And btw, the model 3 being compared is the top of the line one, is that a third of the price?
The S can't even do a lap on the Nürburgring either without overheating, and that's without starting pretty warm already... So any points you thought you had just went up in smoke.
M4XC4V413R4 a purpose built car - for the track, overheats. It doesn’t matter that the battery was warm when started. The Porsche engineers didn’t put that into the equation before they made a production line? The Model S was never designed for the track, but a purpose built family sedan that just happened to go quick. The plaid model S seems to be different, who knows what it can do? The plaid model S, which has already been at the ring, has unofficially beaten the Taycan by a conservative 20 seconds. That’s at 120mph avg speed....for 20 seconds. That’s more than 1/2 mile(~1 km) it was beaten by. Pretty sad I’d say and somewhat disappointed. And I’m a Porsche guy....
@@yingnyang2889 what purpose built car for the track? They're both road cars...
Of course speed & charging systems will continue to improve & rightly so. I have recently changed vehicles from an old 30kwh Leaf, to a Kia with a 64kwh battery & max charging speed of only 75kw. Before my purchase this bothered me & l though long & hard about a M3 SR+ due to its higher charging speeds. Now a few months & many long trips later l can honestly say 50kw chargers are fine, l really appreciate the break & if l go to 77% l don't seem to be waiting long after eating & rest room. As you say it's price rather than speed for me.
Very interesting video and it made a lot of sense. 800V seems to be a marketing stunt as well.
However, another advantage w 800V could be that the wiring used in the car is thinner, weighs less and takes up less space. Cracking the wiring code for EV can give an edge in mass production. The Porsche Taycan though has a smaller battery and weighs more that the Model S even w those thinner wires 😅
Great technical video! Thank you Bjørn, make more videos like this one
In the Model 3 lap some performance degradation started at the end of the first lap, considering the length of the Nurburgring if the Taycan started to see degradation only after 1.5 lap this represent a significant advantage.
Yes and he couldn't push it as hard as he wanted because the brakes got too hot
@@xLaserwalker Tesla 3 brake overheat warning after just 5.3 km, 1/4 of Nordschleife lap.
Save Rio - You’re comparing a purpose built sports car with a retail price of ~$240k to a family sedan that costs $60k. A much fairer test would be comparing a Tesla Roadster 2 to a Taycan.
@@TraditionalAnglican the Taycan is a Gran Turismo lmao. It's not an electric 911
@@TraditionalAnglican This is true for all the dynamic performaces of the car, here we are considery the tecnology behind the battery. If you take in consideration a 130k Model S you will have the same results.
Certainly cable heating will be less if the current is less. The hotter the cable, the more losses you get. But, is it significant? I think you make a good case here that it isnt. The other argument is "Time is money" so faster is better. But again, your point is well made that this is ICE thinking. Fill up, then go for a coffee (or Toilets and then coffee). My experience is that charging the Tesla is just the right amount of time to (do what you need to do and) get a coffee and drink it. Probably makes for a more alert driver and more rewarding driving experience. In other words, faster is not necessarily better. Finally, things will evolve. We need all electric cars to charge up in a reasonable amount of time (15-30 mins) so whatever gets us there.
In my experience from Formula Student on working on Accumulator, the losses inside the accumulator are quite similar for 400V as 800 V. You do get smaller losses outside of the accumulator, but where it made the biggest difference for us were the engines. If a team could afford to make their own engines it was quite beneficial to switch to higher voltages.
So when comparing both concepts I wouldn't only consider the battery pack and the cabling, but the motors too.
But on the other hand finding a charger for more than 450V, making your own engines and so on are such a pain that it is a big tradeoff.
Any idea of price desparity between 400v and 800v motors and electronics? Rarely anyone mentions that... in rc world, cost is almost exponential with higher volts...
@@DG-uv3zw I have no idea how expensive it is to build one compared to the other.
Basically 450V is the standard, and you can't find nearly anything for higher voltages on the market.
Hello Björn, I think you missed two important points in your 800V comparison:
1: Back EMF: Electric motors suffer from an effect called Back-EMF. What it basically does, explained in simple words, is limit the power output of a motor the higher its spinning. Thats why you see EVs accelerate really well from 0-100, but not so much from 150-200. With 800V system, the higher voltage reduces the effect of back EMF and therefore its important to design sports cars like Taycan with 800V.
2: Smaller wires and motor: The same electric motor can theoretically output double the power at 800V than 400V. That means that you will end up with a smaller motor at same output levels, which will make the car lighter. Also the internal wiring can be designed smaller and therefore less heavy.
Model 3 lap, they did some cooling in between seems like because of a speed restriction.
There was power limit applied as well.
Yup, there is a portion of the ring that has a speed limit.
and he could not go full out becasue of overheating brakes.
Thanks for making this video. I googled what are the advantages and disadvantages of 800 volt to find it.
Great point of view. But your point of view is from the perspective of a vehicle Model 3/Y sized. Vehicle electrification will need to apply all vehicles of all sizes. We are starting to see EV trucks/vans and other commercial vehicles that will be coming available over the next few years. Many of these will have battery packs up to 200KWh. Here 800V charging will be a must. Even for vehicles like the Tesla Cybertruck which will be somewhat disadvantaged if it has a 400V architecture. And if 800V becomes universal might as well take advantage of it on all vehicles.
A friend of me has a Tesla Model 3 Performance, he's charging a bit, slowly, everyday from home. He gets home in the evening after work then just simply plug it in. It costs him just a couple of euros at max.
Not so long ago he had to make a "long" trip of more than 600km (just a walk for Bjørn I guess, lol) and had to stop supercharging 20mn.
Can't remember how fast he charged, but he leaved to have a coffee while reading the news peacefully for a few minutes...He had to finish it fast after a few minutes because the time that you walk to the place, order your coffee, and install, it's already almost 10mn.
I think that Tesla is now fast enough in charging time and has enough range with the long range and performance models, it's getting almost too fast, people just need to plan their trips differently from ICE cars...
Can't wait to be on the 22th of september for the #BatteryDay , could be the final step to the electric cars obviousness.
When I starting doing trips (North America) with my LR AWD, 2 years ago, I would at times be waiting a few minutes depending on the stop. And for overall speed of travel I'd hit every just about every SC on route. Then they started tweaking software, opening up the full potential for most SC, upgrading some of the oldest SC (there's still some older gear out there that's limited to 120kW range), and then further modifying the charging curve on my vehicle.
Now, even without V3 stations, the car is almost always ready ahead of me and skipping every 2nd SC is about as fast (kind depends on if you have to detour much off route for a given SC).
Having gotten used to the prior speeds, it can even be slightly annoying now how fast it is. :) It is really hard to finish a sit-down meal at a busy restaurant before the car's done, even if I set it to say a 95% SOC limit.
That's with only 145kW peak (usually I don't see the full 150kW nominal on V2 SC). On the edges there's going to be some people that'll make use of higher speeds, and for very busy SC it'll be good to have throughput that'll reduce/eliminate waiting lines. But outside that we're already "fast enough" before 200kW+ speeds.
Tell that to the vast majority of the city population in my country (Portugal). Hundreds of thousands of people who live in apartments with no garages and still park their cars on the street, buildings with garages with no individual/closed parking spots, that would need dozens of thousands of euros in construction work.
The latter is my case. Since doing that would be extremely expensive, a very long job forcing people to leave their cars outside (prone to stealing), and the need to have a majority voting for it, since everyone would have to pay for it, I don't see it happening. Charging the car would have to be as fast and convenient as filling your tank.
I am lucky to have a second house where I could charge the car, but I don't go there every week so the range of the car would have to be at least double of what the Model S has. I mean, when have long trips I can do more than 600km at 150Kph in my diesel A5, stop for 2-3 minutes to fill it up and go again. When will an electric car be able to do that?
@@smashingwarden
Street changing/public parking (not dedicated to a given person) will definitely be a thing in places.
> I mean, when have long trips I can do more than 600km at 150Kph in my diesel A5, stop for 2-3 minutes to fill it up and go again. When will an electric car be able to do that?
Since it is possible to charge at 250 KW with a 400 V system, and 250 KW is fast enough for any automotive application, that proves that 400 V is sufficient. For trucking applications, higher than 250 KW charging rates will be required, necessitating higher voltages.
I Don't believe the amount of copper saved in an auto by going to 800 V results cost savings significant enough to overcome its disadvantages. In particular, the need for DC to DC conversion.
"250kw is fast enough for any automotive application"
For passenger cars, probably, but in the US, at least, I think we're going to find out with electric pickups and large suvd, which will probably get 2 miles per kwh at highway speeds on a good day, that a 250kw recharge speed, isn't going to be fast enough to convince your average joe to convert to EV, outside gas/diesel going over $6.00 a gallon.
@@thelondonbroiler let's look at that a little more in depth. Assume the pickup has a 150 kWh battery to go 300 miles at 2 miles per kWh. Also assume the larger battery can maintain a 250 kW charge rate up to a 50% SOC. Doing the math, that would allow 150 miles to be added in18 minutes. Seems good enough to me.
@@npbetts1 That's good enough for me too (presently 30 min to get 100 miles in my Bolt). My comment was a prediction of an average Joe in the US. I can already hear average Joe's FUD, "you mean every two hours I have to stop for 18 minutes?" I've given literally over a thousand EV rides to mostly people that had never been in an EV. The pushback to having to stop a little while to charge is illogical but pervasive.
@@thelondonbroiler That is unfortunately true. They fail to see the advantage of charging at home 95% of the time far outweighs the disadvantage of longer stops during the 5% (or less) of the time they are on longer trips.
A truck needs around 130 kW for driving at 90 km/h. After 5 hours it needs a break for 30 Min. In this time it needs 750 kWh. That is a charging speed of 1,5 MW or 800 V @ 1875 A🤷♂️
I've also given this very thing some thought lately. The stations required to make electric class 8 trucks an acceptable replacement for the majority of the industry, would certainly be in there ballpark of what you specified (over a (edit) megawatt).
Heavy vehicles like HGVs and buses will probably move to Hydrogen Fuel Cell technologies just for the ease of refueling. Even if hydrogen is really bad at energy density compared to fossil, the energy density of hydrogen is just much better than current batteries.
Siemens is looking into getting HGVs into using a 750V DC overhead line system, not too unlike trolleybuses, but with pantographs instead, more like a train. The HGVs could run at 90-110 km/h and draw all their power from the overhead lines for highway driving, switching to batteries once off the highway and going towards a freight hub.
We could be looking at cars and motorcycles completely going to batteries while heavy vehicles move to hydrogen or overhead line solutions.
@@rogerstarkey5390 At that theoretical 1 megawatt charge speed, it's still going to take 40-45 min to get 300 miles of range, and for most trucking, this will be a twice a day occurrence. Demonstration of concept does not equal practicality, as much as I would like it to.
@@davids.6671 Definitely a good concept and hopefully practical.
130 kW during 5 h = 650 kWh ; 650 kWh during 0,5 h = 1300 kW charging, means 1625 A under 800 V DC
Taycan's cooling system is pretty sophisticated. But also quite space-consuming and weighing quite a lot too. We can clearly see that they wanted to go for performance no matter how and when. Which is good since they are Porsche, a noble german sports car manufacturer with a big history in building fast cars. The 800V architecture is clearly benefiting the entire performance and has the nice side effect of higher charging rate capabilities. However, it is quite astonishing that Model 3 has a similar fast charging in comparison, giving that it relies on a 400V architecture and a much simpler cooling system. All in all I'm really looking forward to what the future holds in the EV Market! It's so fantastic to see the fast progress in technology currently!
So the conclusion is that if we run more we will die faster!
No, Einstein said the faster you run the longer your clocking time. So put more on your pedal.
Depends on what you are running away from ;)
If you do this all the time, yes.
I hate the false claims that people make about 800V. It's more of a marketing strategy if anything:
1. 800V is not inherently faster - it is only faster if the main HV path current limit (fuse, contacts, wire gauge, busbar sizing) is the limiting factor. The amount of current going through each cell will be the same, and P = I^2*R, where R is the internal resistance of the cell which causes heating in the battery. While charging at a higher voltage, you only have less losses in the HV path theoretically, but HV path should be sized in order to accommodate less current anyways so the losses should be roughly similar. This is a very small loss compared to the battery.
2. 800V motors are not inherently better. It gets complicated but basically as long as power is the same the size/weight of the motor will be roughly similar, as well as losses. Of course there are other factors to consider here but nothing game-changing
3. There is more part availability/cheaper parts for 400V systems, and stepping up the voltage can introduce unwanted safety/regulation problems in the design process. It's probably worth moving towards just to get that slight edge on your vehicle weight/efficiency, but it really won't make that much of a difference - not nearly as much as everyone says.
4. The main reason the Taycan can do these runs over and over is NOT because of 800V, but because of their battery cell selection as well as the cooling system. This is why the range takes a hit - you either get energy density in the cell or power density. In this case they've gone for a power dense design (less internal resistance = less heating).
How is it that you get the same current in every cell? I’m not saying you are wrong. I just don’t understand it because on one hand, the kWh of the entire pack is the same so you need the same amount of power from the charger and into the cells. However, my logic would be that you are trading current for voltage to get te same power input. An example:
Scenario 1: 400V battery charged at 200kW
System Voltage: 400V
System current: 500A
400*500= 200000w (200kw)
Scenario 2: 800V battery charged at the same 200kW
System voltage: 800V
System current: 250A
800*250= 200000w (200kW)
What I see is that you can indeed get lower current values. What am I getting wrong?
There's an important distinction between total pack current and the current through each individual cell. If two (400V & 800V) packs have the same amount of cells and energy, the extra current (in the 400V scenario) is going through the extra cells in parallel.
@@teropiispala2576 Curiosity always gets the better of people. I think people will learn about implementation eventually, just as they have with combustion vehicles. It's just a matter of educating them
MCSGproject Ok, I now see. I had to draw a schematic myself to understand it. So the only thinner wires are the ones that come from the car’s charger input to the main positive an negative of the battery and the cables fin the battery to the motor
Elon has mentioned higher voltage recently. Not in direct relation to charging I believe, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he was referring to it.
I do expect Tesla to go to a higher voltage but only when it makes sense. Unlike Porsche where customers will pay anyway, if it makes sense or not.
And meanwhile, Ionity is too expensive for most people...
TroglodyteN Tesla have offered the ability to use the Superchargers to other manufacturers but none took him up on the offer.
TroglodyteN a Fan boy because Ionity are too expensive? Even if you have a subscription you have to pay monthly. Most users won’t need (or should use) constant very fast charging due to the damage it causes in the batteries. So either way, you are paying Ionity to use or not use the chargers they provide.
@@xlatjo ionity got subsidies from the state for building their few charge points, Tesla did not, stop whining that you german nation fan boy can not charge at sucs.
i feel like there should be an option to limit the charging speed in 50kw increments (starting from 50kw).
"Hey Tesla, can you manage 250kW today?"
YES, DAVE, I'M FEELING FINE AND READY TO TAKE A FULL CHARGE
"Very good, Tesla, go ahead and drive me to work, then go get yourself a 250kW charge before you start yours."
CERTAINLY DAVE.
OH, AND DAVE
"Yes, Tesla?"
THANK YOU FOR ASKING SO NICELY.
😲
Regarding superchargers, BKK is now constructing 6 stalls with 960V chargers in Bergen, at least two of them have 200A CHAdeMO in addition to CCS.
They have installed 6 175kW ABB power packs (DC rectifiers).
They have the price as Grønn Kontakt, so Ionity gets a run for their money...
Most new 75kW+ chargers support 800V+ systems so there is no need to install 350kW like Ionity to utilize it. It's only Delta that does not support it by default on their HPC.
For example all Hyperchargers support up to 1000V, even the 75kW one. And they are not more expensive than the 400V Delta chargers.
agreed, the charger isn't mush more expensive but the power to supply it is
@@johnchartrand5910 How is it more expensive to supply a 150kW charger that supports 1000V vs one that's only supports 500V?
@@baldurornoskarsson1204 power is far more expensive due to demand fees when it is used.
@@johnchartrand5910 A 150kW 500V charger needs the same power from the grid as a 150kW one that supports 1000V.
@@baldurornoskarsson1204 yes but the reason these high voltage chargers are put in is to support 250kw or 350kw
Lucid is using a 900V system. The reasoning is generally to reduce weight (thinner wiring etc.).
The reasoning is for marketing purposes... more than the Taycan.
Absolutely! Normally you only use HPCs during roadtrips. On my last one, I ALWAYS needed more time to relax/eat/use toilet than the constant 150 kW charging e-tron 🔌 So chill and don‘t grill.
wow! very interesting video, and i sort of kept pace with you. Semi trucks might have an influence on things but there seems no rush to roll out 800V systems. Systems using efficiency over brute force seem better to me so lower V is cool.
800V may be not useful today, but clearly it is a future. It is better to move to 800V today rather when market is saturated with different tech.
Ah, one word on IONITY...my theory...the high price per kWh for non-consortium customers...is.a fend-off price. They want the infrastructure to be available to the customers of the consortium, not for the walk-ins. However, as they grabbed EU money for implementing the infrastructure, they have to be open to everybody - unlike Tesla.
@Wolfgang Preier sorry, I don't get your point. Comparison between SC and IONITY is futile, I reckon they are both cost centers. In case of SC it is only Tesla, in case of IONITY it is the consortium and they will allocate cost to the consortium members. The amount of money asks, the compensation model, soley depends on how much compensation for the cost is desired. If Tesla would compensate SC cost soley by car sales, SC would be free (does that ring a bell?) So, we will see more or less complex compensation models. At the end of the day, the consortium must come up with an offering that can compete with Tesla. Prio one I daresay is availability, reliability and ease of use. To beat Tesla on the latter is allegedly hard. To sustain availability, keeping the charge points available for those who bought a car from the consortium a fend-off price is key. Because they were not shamed enough not to grab the EU money, they HAVE to be open to the public. Tesla did not ask any money - that's probably the only reason why they get away with their closed shop model. Again, comparing price per kWh between SC and IONITY is futile. One thing for sure - in my humble opinion - is: IONITY will not and is not supposed to generate profit directly from selling energy. It's a catalyst to fuel (sic!) car sales. Why would I buy a Tesla (if I could afford one), not only because of the design, the software, efficiency and performance but also because of SC. The reputation of SC is legendary. And IONITY the attempt of a consortium of car makers to keep up with that. Allego 50kW and the like will sell you no e-tron and no Taycan.
@Wolfgang Preier sigh..that's for the balance sheet, right? Somebody will pay their (IONITY's) bill. And yes, they will invoice the members. Does German Law also demand how much profit a company has to make? Hm? At the end of the day, it must be an attractive case for the consortium members. The sole purpose of IONITY is to support consortium car sales. How to turn that into a compliant business model - they will have the proper personnel to work that out.
Well thought out Bjorn. Thank you!
battery capacity will be bigger in the not so far away future...to keep up with capacity, the charging speed must be adapted. To keep amps and resistance low, voltage needs to go up. Never has math been simpler as with electricity. So, 70-100 kWh is the pinnacle today, and maybe 150kWh in the near future...when the first serious trucks arrive...will they be laid out to charge en route? They will come with huge batteries for sure. So yes, 800V makes sense to me. We will also see what Tesla will have to offer.
Higher capacity doesn't necessarily mean faster charging or discharge speed. You can put a bigger fuel tank in your car and it won't make it any faster.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 That was not my point. People will demand larger batteries to have greater range. To fill the larger battery from 10 to 80 in the same time as the smaller one, guess what you need? Goodness...
@@rogerstarkey5390 interesting info, indeed. Then, there is an on-going discussion wether or not bigger packs will be required or demanded by the customer. However, battery packs have grown bigger by the years. If technology advances enough - and I have a fool's faith in technology - the energy density per kg or volume will increase. If that turns into more capacity or less weight and size is a matter of the desired design. So will there be a "magic boundary" where battery size increase will come to an end? At least in my country, range is the number one counter-argument against e-mobility. And charging speed simply cannot beat range (that is efficiency combined with capacity) if you have to counter "my car needs 5 minutes at the pump". The different thinking required to accept "smart & fast charging" still requires more stop. For me, quite a few stops between start and destination are desired - but not that much by those "iron man diesel drivers". Now it happens that latest entries to the market do not excel with efficiency - being fat and SUV shaped. Adding a bigger battery sure helps to lift the car over the magic boundary where potential buyers would make a purchase. Now - that's my personal belief - people also do not want to accept longer charging time to fill the bigger battery...thus charging speed needs to improve. Again, my personal belief, that's the rationale behind 350kW charging. What Tesla thinks and does is not necessarily what others think & do - or regretfully have to do (by not being Tesla - which are allegedly years ahead of their competitors). But this carries us away from 800V versus 400V - higher voltage or higher amps are required for more power - higher voltage seems to have fewer downsides. Interesting to see if there will be a co-existence of 400V vs 800V or if either one will disappear (like my feeble Type 2 22kW for example, what I'm really afraid of).
@@MacBaerFFM As Bjorn already answered somewhere else, if you had more capacity to begin with (charged at home, overnight) it is likely you wouldn't need to charge so much on the move to reach your destination. Human factors taking care of the rest of the arguments ;-)
Great and simple to understand, even form this Dutchman 👍😊
About Nurgburgring your facts are wrong. Was expecting better fact checking from you ;)
Model 3 had a slowdown/coolldown in the middle of the lap for 30 sec or so, it was not going flat out in the 1st part of the lap (only mini cooper fast), but probably close enough to full performance. In the 2nd part of the lap model 3 was hangiong on to a briskly driven Porsche GT3 RS which is excellent, but it soon overheated the brakes and had to slow down somewhat, at the end of the lap it started to throttle slightly and if it was going for the 2nd lap it would presumebly not get cooler, but continue to overheat even more. Taycan performed considerably better both in terms of brake performance (excellently as all fast Porsches) and battery thermal envelope (over 1 lap at full pace, 7 min something lap).
Hi Bjorn,
In 2021 Hyundai as a whole really made a breakthrough with their 800 V integrated charging system:
1∘ traction batteries are now in 800 V string(s) which reduces connectors pins, wiring gauge, and joule losses effects (squared)
2- their SKI battery charging characteristics…
…Have flatter higher amplitude and much flatter lower values Cpeak /Cavg horizontal curves unlike Tesla and other competitors
3- to optimize vehicle weight we can now have less extreme range / recharge time ratios I.e. isn’t a 10-80% for a full 500 km range recharge in 18 minutes better than a hypothetical heavier 1000 km battery in one hour meaning 2 times 18 minutes vs a single 60 minute recharge?
Also Hyundai has a patented trick that directly accepts 400 V chargers (
I think the main advantage at some point in the future will be that the charging cable and connector can more easily keep up with the amount of Power. If you have a 150kWh battery pack and want to charge it with the same overall C rating on the charge cycle. Than the amount of Amps on a 400V flex cable will become a bit crazy.
People forget that the primary reason for 800 V is for charging, not necessarily for operating efficiencies. Yes, the CCS standard is limited to 500 A; however, that is a sustained 500 A. Huber + Suhner recently released a CCS cable capable of providing 500 A for sustained periods, even in hot temperatures. www.hubersuhner.com/en/products/low-and-high-voltage/cable-systems/high-power-charging-systems/radox-hpc500
Tesla's proprietary charging standard does supply more current, which enables the Model 3 to charge at 250 kW versus the Porsche Taycan's 270 kW peak. However, Tesla's charging equipment might not pass independent certification safety standards (such as UL). It's apparent that Tesla is pushing their equipment beyond the limits of what would be considered safe (something an open, public charging standard couldn't do), so the 800 V (technically 950 V on the charger side) is the best workaround for that limited current. This also might be why the Model 3 can only accept 250 kW for about 15 minutes (typically the cutoff point for sustained 100% loads).
One other consideration is that batteries are getting bigger. The upcoming GMC Hummer EV will have up to a 200 kWh battery, so even charging at a sustained 400 kW would only be a 2 C charging rate. Far lower than both the Model 3 and the Taycan.
A very clear and useful explanation. Thankyou.
Early peak charging speed vs. long flat curve is for convenience & charger usage optimization. Some portion of charging session only need a quick add of 30% to 40% SOC - having early peak gets this job done faster, and allows more users / charging stall. However - a more modest (& extended) early peak would be a good compromise.
Note that electrical / thermal rating (how much heat for how long) is anyway always trading off peak vs. sustained - so short & high peaks don't necessarily add much equipment cost (thermal limits) vs. medium/sustained peaks. Grid connection cost would be higher however.
i think 800v is that as charging powers rise, low voltage demands bigger cables for the amperage.
you can only go so high before the cable becomes unweildly on a 400v system.
@@abraxastulammo9940
are they going to carry 600-800kw in the near future?
you need to think about a decade from now.
Regarding Supercharger V3:
No one seems to see the bigger picture here. On the type label of a V3 is written 1000V DC and 425 Ampere.
V2 has 410V. All current Tesla Vehicles have only 404V max. Voltage! You think what I think?
Currently there is a big Rollout in Europe of V3 Superchargers (Like there was a Rollout of CCS Cabels in Europe before the first Model 3 deliveries! Which only have CCS in Europe)
In one month there is Batteryday as everyone knows 😉
I predict the new Drivetrain/Battery will have at least a 800V to 1000V backbone.
Wait there is more: To charge a Model 3 with 250KW and 404V max. there are 618Ampere needed. I guess the V3 type label underreports like the ones on V2 (410V 270A is only 110KW but they provide 150KW)
So a V3 Supercharger should be able to provide at least 618KW!!!
Newer Tesla Vehicles with Drivetrain of Batteryday should be able to charge extremly fast!
Keep in mind - Elons said about the planed 350KW Taycan charging speed something like: What is this? A mere kids toy?
No one speaks about that! Why? 😉
@Wolfgang Preier Yes for sure. Potential 800V+ will be only for top end Models like Model S Plaid or so.
I guess also Model 3/Y will stay on present 400V for the next time.
The Model 3 will reach 250kW at 10% SOC and 367 Volts. That results in a max draw of 681 Amps.
See here: ruclips.net/video/ACmymJtNglQ/видео.html
@@baldurornoskarsson1204 So even more potential! 😁 I know I wrote only a baseline with my quick and dirty calculation at max voltage. But even that is unbeliveable!
1000 V is on AC-DC rectification side.... On DC-DC Conversion side its 500 Volts max.
600A at 400V is borderline crazy already, the future needs to be 800V or 1200v to lower the amps to something less scary.
Having a 800V or 1200V battery pack rather than 400V is far more dangerous than needing more amps for charging.
Charging cables can be cooled down with coolant. And connectors and cables have sensor to sense temp in case of overheating.
@Art Uro it does matter a lot. It has to do with isolation, chances of archs,relays, begin able shut it off in case of fire, and many other things that are long to explain.
Not saying 400 is "low" and those risks er eliminated, but at 800 or 1200 they are even more pronounced. And there are some benefits with higher voltage also.
@Art Uronevermind. Does look you are stuck in your thoughts.
Its not about you touching the terminals. They have no voltage anyway until the connector is connected and the handshake is done. There are other factors to be considered, where the voltage makes difference.
@Art Uro No. There is huge difference! AC is much more deadly than DC. 400 VDC can kill, but if connection is not perfect it will not kill. (Leak after accident ...) 800 VDC is much more than twice as dangerous.
@Art Uro Depends what you want. 1V will certainly not kill me. Current CPUs and GPUs use about 1V and up to ~200 W (or more).
For cars 400 VDC is very good compromise between safety and efficiency. Only advantage 800 V has is less metal in cables. Insulation has to be thicker for same safety, so cables are not thinner. In cars distances are short, so there is no need for 800 V. I would absolutely choose 400 V instead of 800 V. 800 V is only marketing gimmick. Claims of faster charging speed are complete bullshit. Charging speed is limited by cell (about 4 V).
Never mind the voltage, it s the charging C rate at cell level that counts.
But having higher voltage system help everywhere else except the motor. Double Volt = half Amperes.
For the motor, it change practicly nothing. 100v 10A is the same motor as 100A 10V.
It the connectors and components this help.
Motor heat for EV is also a big problem. Especially for a motor with permanent magnets. Even on Audi E-Tron SUV and Sportback both rotor and stator is liquid cooled. Beside motor also waste heat in inverter must be cooled. When you have higher voltage you have much less waste heat.
Bjorn, I know you may know that already .. with higher voltage you can run lass amps and also reduce the wire gauge .. so I think it’s more like no one setup a good use case for 800v or higher just yet plan design battery that can support it .. anyways all that truly does not matter because, Tesla needs to copy Audi 55 charging profile and charge deep into the pack vs just a few min at 250 .. run that deep into the pack like up to 80% for the win .. right now even at 150k peak that is run deep into the pack wins..
Better to have and not need than need and not have. If it fast charges at a lower speed more of the time but you rarely need that max charge speed, at least you have the option at 800v
The higher voltage the more humidity becomes a problem ,breakdown of insulation bodies and components .
It may become a problem if you are using low quality and poorly constructed parts
You didn't watch that model 3 on the Nürburgring, did you? It did overheat before even finishing the first lap, the guy just stopped pushing it to the max to cool it off, he was already getting power limited just above half a lap in.
Of course I watched it. The problem for them was shitty stock brakes. But even if the color on the battery went from green to orange, it doesn't mean that you're out of power. It can still deliver decent punch. And it goes back to green quick again if it can rest a bit.
I would like to adjust the supercharger speed. A visit to the WC and order some food and... charge is complete just when you get the food and have to move the car! Shiiiiet!
Yeah, it's kinda funny how that works. People used to the gas paradigm swear charging is too slow, but when you've shifted into the EV paradigm, it can actually be too fast, since you're typically doing "things" while charging. I wouldn't have believed it, if I didn't experience it a few times.
Also, the additional component cost of 800V systems => expensive repairs down the road. Plus the additional weight of the step-up converter.
I 100% agree with everything you have said. Porsche have backed a looser on this one and made their car uncompetitive.
Tesla has another truck up it’s sleeve for higher peak currents.... Super Capacitors, likely mounted on the motors which could double as strong brakes, perhaps solid state brakes?
You're right.
But the future is 800V because Porsche/Vag/Ionity needed to do something "different", and they pushed for this change. Even if it was not the best value-price option. People didnt need 800V, but Porsche/others did. Its an unjustified change.
Thank you Ionity for moving CCS charging forward; providing charging for both class 400 V and 800 V cars. Trucks and buses usually are 700 V battery and motors. They also use CCS chargers with 800 V. Ionity do not yet do charging bays that makes it easy to charge trucks, but FastNed do.
@@foersom5928 Ionity is a bluff. They stealed 39 million euros of public funds to make expensive superchargers for Taycans and for Germans and countries within the neigborhood. Also, 0,79€? Thieves and robbers. Ionity is the greates threat to electric mobility.
Ionity is the worst ever and I will use any other charging alternative at all costs.
Ionity delenda est.
More than 400 V systems only make sense for larger vehicles, since you can use smaller cables. So 10 kV for charging semis for example would make sense - like tested in Germany currently with overhead wires.
While the voltage running from the battery to the motor is a completely different busissness. Maybe 800 V is fine for that, or even 400 V, since the cable ways are pretty short.
Renault also went backwards for some years. In the beginning you was able to charge the Zoe with 43 kW and then they developed their own Renault motor, which can only charge with 22 kW.
Just some years later, they higher the charging power again with CCS DC charging. But it’s not really that much faster than the 43 kW AC charger. Because the input power at the battery is not 50 kW, even the charger provides 50 kW
ZE50 actually charges way faster than the old Q-variants with 43 kW. You forget the poor 80 % efficiency in the chameleon chargers. So when the plug delivers 43 kW, you're only getting 34 kW into the battery. ZE50 can get 45 kW into the battery. Big difference.
The Model 3 on Mischa's Nurburgring Lap DID overheat a bit towards the end, and that was without being pushed to 100% (due to the brakes fading earlier). However, probably not strictly voltage related.
400 V (actually up to 500 V) is fine for most consumer cars now and at least 10 years into the future. 800 V will be used for performance cars and cars with large batteries. 800 V CCS chargers are also needed for trucks and buses, they usually use 700 V battery and motors so they can not be charged on 400 V chargers.
Its one reason I feel the highest power superchargers are few and far between. If Tesla knows it degrades battery faster, you announce the quicker charger but then limit the overall deployment.
I agree with you on the 800V topic, it might have some advantages, but it also has some problems that come with it. (Including some legal hurdles... 400V is after all a "houshold standard"...)
I do not agree on the 250KW though. With increasing battery sizes (which will also come with increasing numbers of individual cells) you can push more power into the system in parallel, without straining the individual cell more than you would do today. Do we actually need that? I don't know. But being able to charge 500 km of range in 5 minutes or less would take the last argument away from patrol cars...
They will come up with new arguments... 😉
That's exactly what I have been talking about in this video and the other one 2 years ago. People who *think* they need to recharge in 5 minutes have never owned a fast charging EV like Taycan, Model 3 or e-tron before. They have a fossil mindset.
@@nakfan Sure thing. But right now they actually have one...
@@bjornnyland I own a Model S, so I have some experience with it by now too. If you live in a situation where you can't charge at home the charging time becomes a struggle in some situations. My next "useful" charger is about 15 minutes walk away from my home, and it has an output of 11KW, so I have to leave the car there if I use it. In most cases I can avoid taking that trip and charge whenever I stop somewhere where I have a destination charging opportunity. But in those cases where I can't (e.g. next weekend I have four trips planned in rather short succession and no destination charging in any of those locations) this becomes a hassle. I will manage for sure, but not without loosing time that I would never loose in a petrol car.
(And to make matters worse, on the trip next weekend I don't even have a supercharger anywhere on the way...)
It's a corner case, sure, but it's nonetheless reality.
Tesla will go to 800V systems for some of their vehicles within 5 years.
It should only be needed for the Semi Truck.
Yup. The cyber truck will need 800v
@@rogerstarkey5390 this: split the batteries, charge 2x....
It really all comes down to how much current you can safely and reliably pass through the connectors between the car and its charger. It's trivial and relatively cheap to increase the size of the conductors inside of a car to accommodate the higher currents associated with a lower voltage supply. (As we've already seen with the Model 3 and Y). The stumbling block is when trying to fast charge. Connectors tend to degrade when in the elements, and also whenever they're mated and taken apart. Any imperfections in the mating surfaces will cause extra heating in the connections. We've already seen that Tesla's connectors can handle the ~650 amps being plowed through them. But with larger capacity batteries coming in the new Roadster and Cybertruck, maintaining a relatively fast charge will require amperages to roughly double. Again, this won't be a huge deal for the cabling of the charger or car, but the connectors will need to be *very* robust to reliably handle this current without overheating, or you'll just have to deal with getting "only" 250 KW. 😁
I'd wager, 400V will be the standard for the vast majority of passenger cars, while 800V will probably be the standard for larger vehicles with >100KWH capacity such as light duty trucks, vans, etc.
Twice the Voltage means Half the Copper for the same Power.
Costs less and weighs less (though it needs more insulation)
@@harmhoeks5996 for 800V nominal voltage you need about 216 Lithium Battery Cells of 3.7V in Series.
If one of these cells goes bad, then it gets a high internal resistance and you have a bad battery.
The BMS might be albe to handle that, but I kind of doubt it.
I'm pretty sure you can't full measure and monitor 216 independent cells, detect bad ones and somehow bypass them individually.
Bad engineering is the downside.
sorry forgot to add the cabling would only need to half the size saving weight
Weight on EVs is not a problem at all. Just look at how efficient heavy Teslas are compared to other EVs.
Yes, it is for cars. It adds complexity and cost to the car and DC charging equipment.
For truck and race car applications with a constant high power demand and large batteries, 800V is the way to go.
The reason for a higher temperature in the taycan on track is because of its regeneration. It is 3 times as high as the teslas. So think like that it has never a Pause no second. It ist like discharging and hpc charging in a 20second interval.
For passenger cars 800V is pure luxury. Not needed. But for long range trucks this could be very useful.
@@rogerstarkey5390 of you think so. I dont think the future of truck charging will be plugging multiple chargers into one Socket.
We will see
it always depends on the requirement porsche has released its first (new age) electric car so i think the roadmap will show what it will bring. when the battery gets bigger a higher voltage (800v) makes sense specially for trucks, busses. for smaller cars like L7e you could use even a 48v board system where the charging is with 230v or 11kw loader.
i think you missed that the taycan recuperates/regenerates at 260 kW during braking, in parallel with the physical brakes, so its none stop stress on the battery during its lap. isnt the model 3 either braking or regenerating (at 'only' 60 kW), but not both simultaneously? the model 3 also ran into temperature issues with its battery.
i also think i remember you doing an acceleration, but not a full deceleration during your model 3 test on the autobahn, so the car could cool whenever you reached 200 km/h.
@@rogerstarkey5390 fixed it for you.
Regen on Model 3 is normally at 70 kW. In Track Mode it's at 95 kW. But my example shows that 800 V isn't really a dealbraker if you want track performance.
Bjorn, you are getting there :-)
800VDC charging can allow cheaper and thinner cables from the charging socket to the battery, saving money to Porsche. The stress on the cells are exactly the same.
When comparing to M3, 250kW peak charging on a 74kWh battery is much much higher than 270kW on a 87kWh of the Taycan, although Porsche allowing it to last longer. In your tests, it seems that the charging speeds in terms of percentage are almost identical.
3-phase 220V is has a very natural and efficient conversion to 400VDC, therefore making much more sense.
Main advantage of 800V is at the high RPM, there is a back-EMF that reduces the effective voltage applied on the engine.
The future is with cells to pack, where the effective pack voltage will dynamically change based on SoC and power demands and further increase EV efficiency.
Someone needs to explain why higher voltage equals thinner cables. If I wanted higher water flow I wouldn't use a thinner hosepipe. I'm ready when you are.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 the conductive part of a cable is rated for a specific current - not voltage. You can think about it as a pipe is rated for a maximum current, and a voltage is a height difference that provides the water a potential energy that can deal with more resistance. The downside of it is if your regular needs are for low current, you may end up wasting energy on resistance for your normal needs.
@@Nickbaldeagle02 Power = Voltage × Current
Or W = V × A
So, for a constant power, a lower voltage system needs to provide more Current than a higher voltage system
For example, for you can get 250kW with 400V × 625A or 800V × 312.5A
Lower the current, lower is the heating
Lower the heating, thinner will be the wire
Talking you water and pipe analogy, think of the quantity of water obtained per unit time be the power (kW), the pressure of the water as voltage (V) and the radius of the pipe be (A)
To get a constant water supply, you can use high pressure water in a small pipe or low pressure water in a large pipe
The amount of people on this comment thread that don't understand that North America has a 240v grid is way to high.
In the USA, the *Mains* *Voltage* in most residential units is 120v / 240v AC Split-Phase and 208v/120v or 480v/277v or 600v/347v 3-Phase for commercial / industrial but the voltage used for the Power Transmission *GRID* is much, much higher ... in the 1,000's of volts AC & DC ...
I once owned an electric car, and many moons will pass before I fork out for a new one. They suck.
My current ride is a Suzuki Ignis 4WD, 2001 ;-) ,and I can putt from Særp to Steinkjær without worries.
It almost dont use fuel, has a lousy radio, but lots of knobs to control things like heating and lights.
Its a small, blue friend!
An interesting topic, and some informative discussion afterwards. Yay !
I agree that 200 kW, 2C charging is a sweet spot now and it will be so for a good long while until cell chemistry advances a lot. So how much energy can be saved in an 800V system compared to a 400V system, and at what cost ? The numbers seem to favor closer to 400V than 800V although there are a group of E. Asian manufacturers who seem to be congregating around 450 - 500V nominal pack voltage.
800v architecture + 3 phases on board charging is the real winner 🏆🥇
Bjorn,
the Taycan was fast charged right before the ring, so the battery was heat soaked when they started, that's why it overheated at 1.5 Laps.
Also, both Model 3 and Taycan finished one lap. I want to see what happens with a Taycan that starts properly cooled down, and a Model 3 that starts properly cooled down.
I expect the potential for the 800V over 400V standard is more about where battery tech may be in a couple major generations into the future (so maybe 5+ years out, maybe more like 10 years or more).
When batteries become capable of taking on charge multiples faster than current tech.
Of course the current CCS standard current allowed will be a chokepoint on that then, too. So maybe going 800V now won't really buy much in the future, as we'll need large-scale gear upgrades anyway?
I’m not sure 800V is that important today. Might be once we get to the 200kWh battery packs for the pickup trucks though. Charging speed becomes more important when towing.
Roger Starkey Why not having 200kWh batteries if batteries are getting cheaper every year. I can only imagine an ev having that huge battery doing the 1000km challenge without even charging. Also with such a big battery, c-rate are lower, you cycle less the battery, you demand less from it: less battery degradation
There is a big and well established industry support for 408V. Testing quipment, cabling, fuses, isolation boxes, you name it. Even your average cooking plate uses those components. 800V is nomansland, grid (with quite expensive components) starting at 5-6kV. No reason for reinventing the wheel here, there are enough other hurdles to overcome.
General Motors is going to have an 800 Volt vehicle, with a 200kWhr battery pack. The GMC Hummer EV will be 800 volt, as well as some pickups
Higher the voltage higher the efficency in cabling and inverter electronic. Check CREE MosFET or IGBT transistors to understand, for example. I think 1200v would be future actually!
Only the future will tell. I think I have presented my idea before, but if you can rearrange the battery just for charging I guess if you support 150kW 400V you can support 300kW with 800V just by making at 800-pack during charging. This can be done independently on the pack being 800 or 400 so if Taycan had this it could do that to charge easier on
Very nice video 👍
The only difference is cable thickness, and copper busbar size. For 250kw on 400V, you will need bigger and heavier and more expensive busbars and cabling than 250kw on 800v. The losses are exactly the same, unless you use the heavier cabling/busbars from the 400v system on the 800v architecture. The weight and cost advantage of the 800v system with smaller cables and busbars is mostly offset by needing a on board dc-dc converter for use on 400v chargers. If bigger battery's are getting more common, and the charger cables will still need to be handled by one person when charging 500kw, you have one advantage there with 800v
I think most points you mentioned are the view of present time. The potential of 800V is great, because you don't need thick cables and high curent devices, lower Amps are in general much more easy to handle and on car side simply cheaper... the need of cooling is less, so even in lower class cars and in lower classified batteries you get most of it.
Of course it takes a few years to build this infrastructure, but I think the 800V charging-stations will be in future more and more cheaper and on long term lower Amps are very welcome by manufactors to drop their costs. Maybe also for that reason the joint venture of manufactors are pushing 800V with Ionity...
I honestly think 800V is the future. Think about a (future?) battery with ultra-low resistance - it can charge faster, so pump up the juice.
Waiting to hear the full specs on the Lucid EV - which is 800V and seems to have some crazy specs already!
If Cybertruck (as an example) was 800V - could I not just occupy two 400V chargers - each charging half the battery?
Perhaps the Tesla V3 chargers are 800V ready?
The faster charger are still in needed , Consider most cars being EV hardly ICE and how many charger heads would be provided to that amount?
As more EV's replace ICE vehicles, the current gas pumps will be replaced with charging heads
@@Fredrickarm And how many gas hoses in each station now? How long it fills up those tank?
Once people move over to EVs, more and more fast chargers will pop up in that country. Just look at Norway's impressive charging network. And as pointed out way too many times in this channel; you don't need to recharge too fast as long as you have large enough batteries.
The thing with EVs, is you can typically charge where you park. More homes, more businesses, more groceries, more activity centers, more garages etc. will provide charging, especially in places where it attracts customers to shop/dine. Faster charging may be nice, but EVs really shouldn't be looked at through the lenses of gas cars.
Having carried out surveys of the time taken at various ICE filling stations in the UK the average was between 8 - 10 minutes, which included paying time, probably buying some snacks, etc. The main difference with EV’s is the majority of people will charge at home something most people can’t do with an ICE vehicle. There will be some living in places without parking that can’t do this but they may be able to still charge at work. This means you don’t need as many charging stations as fuel pumps but you do need many more than we currently have in the UK. There is still a lot of misinformation on charging station numbers in the UK, the apps show those at dealerships, which are not actually available to most people plus lots of 7.5kw chargers that are useless when on a long distance drive. This makes the map full of chargers but actually there are very few, especially outside cities.
Bjorn good thinking, as batteries get better bigger lighter the need for 800v may disappear and to be honest now batteries are over the 400 miles range and if they keep getting better and better home charging at 6 to 8 hrs will just be all we need and the batteries will last for ever, whos gonna do 400, 450, 500 miles every day!........lets see Tesla Battery day my be the death of 800v
Very interesting video Bjorn. I looked at the V3 specs and they support 1000v and ~425A. Do you think Cybertruck or Roadster 2020 will support 800V systems because of that?
This might be BS but in my experience it's always better to go with what makes life easier in future. It would be a pain in the a* once battery systems can handle 800V better but you installed 400V chargers everywhere.
Money! It all comes down to money... 80% of Europe will opt for 400v chargers... Even US will mostly start with 400v...
So if you are at a 500amp ccs dcfc why doesn't the Taycan charge at 500kw? I understand that it's software that it charges around 270kw but why does Porsche limit the Taycan as if it was on a 350amp charger and not take advantage of the 500amp current?
800V is supposed to have a lot more advantages then just charging speed. I'm hoping that Sandy Monro does a teardown on the Lucid Air which is a 900V system and like Tesla, and unlike Porsche, is both effecient as well as high performance. Will the Lucid be significantly more effecient than Tesla because of their higher voltage or is their range advantage due mostly to a bigger battery?
"supposed" is the keyword here. When I drove Taycan, I wasn't thinking: "Oh, this 800 V system is awesome." The car felt and drove just like a 400 V car.
These Delta chargers are not that common in other countries. They are popular in Norway with Grønn Kontakt and BKK. You can also find more of them in Switzerland, Greenway in Poland and Slovakia also uses them. Most other operators are using Alpitronic Hypercharger, ABB HPC, Efacec or EVBox and they all support 920 or even 1000V. There are even some 50 kW chargers from ABB which supports 920V (ABB Terra 54 HV).
How is 800v supplied? Is it being stepped-up at the station? I thought ~400v 3-phase was the maximum you could get on a european grid? If being stepped-up, this will have (heat) losses that need to be considered.
Normally it's 400V. But the voltage in the high power lines is significantly higher and since the charging stations need much power, they are probably connected to a 10000 or 20000V line. So it is possible to step it down to 800V.
Ooh, no. The UK railway overhead power lines are 25,000 volts. Have a word with the energy supplier and they'll happily build you a 100,000 volt power supply. For a small fee.
It will be mostly a matter of costs for which system will win. With 800V you would need thinner cables and therefore I would expect lower costs for that. But if costs are increasing with either total power output than the thinner cables might not compensate for that increased power. Or if the support of two voltage systems are increasing costs at the charging stations than this might be also a no-go. Porsche doesn't need to care about costs at the end users. But EVs are becoming more and more a mass market product then prices will matter a lot. On the other hand I think that the 800V system hasn't reached its limits with what Porsche has done so far. So there is probably still room for improvement (maybe less so with the CCS system). And probably most people still agree (and that is still the biggest hurdle for EV haters) that reducing the charging time further from 20min down is still on top of our wish list.
From the perspective of a charging station capacity it is also better to have cars charge at higher rates (= more cars per hour). But for the driver, under a certain charging time there is no added benefit.
YOU are right, too much heating will cook the cells
The Model 3 actually charges faster than the Taycan if you count km/minute instead of kw.
And that's what really matters.
That is only true if Taycan uses 20" and 21" wheels. In my recent test with 19" wheels, Taycan has higher km/h charging speed than Model 3. But how many Taycans will be fitted with 19" wheels? Almost none :P
I agree with Bjørn that the benefits of 800 V vs. 400 V are little, but nevertheless I think it more and more car makers will switch to 800 V or even more. 800 V has the potential to make cars cheaper, 400 V is just cheaper now, because it is already more widely available.