EV general discussion

vapourware article, I had to glance through to make sure it wasnt a hydrogen 'fuel cell'

Cars always have had structural packs, the idea that suddenly wet or dry foil wrapped into a cylinder or folded into a rectangle with layers of jelly electrolyte is stronger than a extruded alumium beam is frankly comedy.

Its like trying to compare filo pastry to a baking tray and then argue the filo pastry is structural. Every single cell to pack battery ive seen moves the cells away from the sills, so you may get a volumetric efficiency benefit for the space used, but theres less space on the car as you have to package away from the sill cos the lateral structural beams dont exist anymore.
 
The more I think about these ‘structural battery packs’ the more I think they are probably not the best idea.

The main advantage seems to be cost cutting at the manufacturing level coming at the expense of repair and reuse. Repair and reuse is a becoming a much bigger item on the agenda and it really should be a priority for obvious reasons.

I get there is a density argument but outside the a and b segment cars, it doesn’t really seem to be an issue.

Unfortunately the current approach seems to be to shove a bigger and bigger battery in the car. I’d much rather manufacturers concentrate on getting their cars to just consume less energy. They then travel further on a charge and means they get more range per the time connected to a charger (rapid or otherwise).
 
the byd cell to pack structural pack, referenced ( more courtesy of their cell design) does seem to offer some structural benefits over the tesla 4680 with its terminals on the top.
medium.com

The Next-Generation Battery Pack Design: from the BYD Blade Cell to Module-Free Battery Pack

This story is contributed by Xinghua Meng and Eric Y. Zheng
medium.com medium.com
so, perhaps, a crap article by wired .. i normally read arstechnica as they seem to have more comments from readers that quickly expose bs

Packs probably not in their new atto 3 which will be a mg4 competitor.

e: interesting benefit of LFP batteries in the linked byd battery article
The thermal decomposition temperature of NMC batteries is around 200 degC, which is easily reached when a short circuit is caused by a penetrating nail. During nail penetration, a large amount of oxygen is released, and, as a result, thermal runaway is triggered immediately. LFP cathodes, on the other hand, have phosphate− polyanions, a stable crystal structure which does not decompose easily. Even at ambient temperatures higher than 500 degC, limited oxygen is released during the nail penetration test. Meanwhile, safety valves can help prevent an explosion by releasing electrolyte, gas, and other chemicals when the internal pressure exceeds a specific threshold. Finally, the surface temperature of a regular LFP battery can be kept below 240 degC.

​

 
From what I understand, structural battery packs are simply about allowing the pack itself to provide structural support for the car and this saving some weight. The battery pack still needs to be protected and the car needs to be structurally sound. The only revolutionary part is that it is a change to how cars are designed/built.

Weight is maybe a little less important to effiency than you would think as regen can scavenge some of the energy spent.
 
I just caught Bjorns video doing 1000km in a Neo ES8 only using battery swaps. Interesting proof of concept but I'm still not entirely sure I 'get it'.

What I do get is that swapping the battery is very convenient and takes about 7-8 mins in total but there are some downsides. The swapped battery 'only' comes with 90% and you can't leave the car while the swap is happening. That means in reality you then need to park and go pee and get any refreshments after so it eats into any time savings. Without taking any brakes it was 45 mins faster than a Model Y over 1000km/620 miles and just 20 mins faster than a Model 3 or BMW i4.

So back in reality outside of a contrived test, I just can't really see this kicking off in a big way. Nearly all of my rapid charging sessions have been under 20 mins because when I do go outside the 220 mile range of my car (Model 3 SR 60kwh), I'm not actually going that much further. Once factoring in the battery swap and a quick pee break, the time savings are negligible.

For these stations to be commercially viable, the utilisation will need to be reasonably high, probably higher than a rapid charger. When being sold on a commercial basis, they are not going to get close to the price of a standard rapid charger. So the question that is posed to EV owners is would go for the convenience of swap station over a rapid charger to save a few minutes assuming a higher cost?

For me the answer is no, I'd rather take the few extra mins to properly stretch my legs after 3+ hours of driving and not shell out the extra for the swap.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
I just caught Bjorns video doing 1000km in a Neo ES8 only using battery swaps. Interesting proof of concept but I'm still not entirely sure I 'get it'.

What I do get is that swapping the battery is very convenient and takes about 7-8 mins in total but there are some downsides. The swapped battery 'only' comes with 90% and you can't leave the car while the swap is happening. That means in reality you then need to park and go pee and get any refreshments after so it eats into any time savings. Without taking any brakes it was 45 mins faster than a Model Y over 1000km/620 miles and just 20 mins faster than a Model 3 or BMW i4.

So back in reality outside of a contrived test, I just can't really see this kicking off in a big way. Nearly all of my rapid charging sessions have been under 20 mins because when I do go outside the 220 mile range of my car (Model 3 SR 60kwh), I'm not actually going that much further. Once factoring in the battery swap and a quick pee break, the time savings are negligible.

For these stations to be commercially viable, the utilisation will need to be reasonably high, probably higher than a rapid charger. When being sold on a commercial basis, they are not going to get close to the price of a standard rapid charger. So the question that is posed to EV owners is would go for the convenience of swap station over a rapid charger to save a few minutes assuming a higher cost?

For me the answer is no, I'd rather take the few extra mins to properly stretch my legs after 3+ hours of driving and not shell out the extra for the swap.
Click to expand...

My concern would be getting a battery that has worse degredation than my original. I rarely ever DC charge and most times I will charge on AC to 90% or less (I-Pace) and it never sits at that SoC for long. So I know battery degredation on my car will be minimal apart from any failures. Imagine getting a battery from a car that was constanly DC charged.
 
ICDP said:
My concern would be getting a battery that has worse degredation than my original. I rarely ever DC charge and most times I will charge on AC to 90% or less (I-Pace) and it never sits at that SoC for long. So I know battery degredation on my car will be minimal apart from any failures. Imagine getting a battery from a car that was constanly DC charged.
Click to expand...
But you would just swap it out next week or next month

Not that I think it's a good idea. I also think rapid charging is at the point where hotswapping isn't really a sensible idea practically or financially
 
chanjy said:
But you would just swap it out next week or next month

Not that I think it's a good idea. I also think rapid charging is at the point where hotswapping isn't really a sensible idea practically or financially
Click to expand...

Agreed, my recollection is that the battery swap idea was first mooted when 50kWh rapids were a luxury. I think it is a solution to a problem that no linger exists.
 
You wouldn’t own the battery in the swap scenario, you’d lease it a la early Renault Zoe’s.

While that’s attractive to some people, you’d end up paying significantly more over the long term, that’s the only reason why those terms exist.

But yeh, I agree that rapid charging and range is at the point that swaps just doesn’t make much sense.
 
I can see from its style that a certain kind of person will be into that but 215hp is kind of weak for a ‘hot hatch’, particularly one that is probably going to be north of 1450kg.

I think the standard electric Kona has over 200hp, fairly sure a Leaf is in that ball park as well for the big battery version.
 
Haha brilliant, my daughter just did a trip one with some videos which was pretty cool so asked her to have a crack and making me one whilst we were sat in the bar. (although mines boring as just pictures) :cry:

Loving the 11kW Tesla destination charger after parking at 32%… Zoe wasn’t plugged in. I’ll move mine in the morning :cool:


X4WrEWZ.jpg
 
Azza said:
Because our payrolls department are absolutely shocking I've still been waiting for an 'official quote' for some cars I enquired about. It's a very weird process.

Good news I've found out from someone else who's used the scheme that it's most definitely salary sacrifice and not some weird deduction from net like the person in payrolls I spoke to was trying to tell me it was. :rolleyes:



Suppose I should check those Taycan prices again. :D
Click to expand...

Finally had an email back from the payroll manager with a quote. It's neither the trim of car I requested nor at a price I can actually see on the website and he didn't include BIK costs.


Why are these things so hard?
 
dLockers said:
Who is your provider?
Click to expand...

It's through Crown Commercial Services Fleet Portal (to give its full title). But the website is terrible you can't just see the cost when you search for a car like you can with Zenith or LeasePlan own website. You have to select (max 3) a car and generate a quote as it does api requests to various suppliers.

So I have to generate a quote on the naff website, then have to send it to payroll to get an 'official' quote, when I want to place the order they'll then send it to someone in procurement who actually makes the order.
 
Azza said:
It's through Crown Commercial Services Fleet Portal (to give its full title). But the website is terrible you can't just see the cost when you search for a car like you can with Zenith or LeasePlan own website. You have to select (max 3) a car and generate a quote as it does api requests to various suppliers.

So I have to generate a quote on the naff website, then have to send it to payroll to get an 'official' quote, when I want to place the order they'll then send it to someone in procurement who actually makes the order.
Click to expand...
Ah that does sound annoying. I had a similar issue getting a quote but that was soon sorted by phoning up and simply asking what they had (wasn't willing to wait months and months), but then didn't pay a thing until yesterdays pay slip as payroll had no instruction to take the money lol. Not sure what that does to me from a tax perspective but it was a nice windfall as I had been accruing what I owed in my finance tracker and I think instead they'll just keep taking payments once I return the car.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
I can see from its style that a certain kind of person will be into that but 215hp is kind of weak for a ‘hot hatch’, particularly one that is probably going to be north of 1450kg.

I think the standard electric Kona has over 200hp, fairly sure a Leaf is in that ball park as well for the big battery version.
Click to expand...

All depends on how it feels, power is not an important number really, if they can make it a fun city car you can enjoy on a b-road it'd be enough, used to be the fun hatches were all 160-200bhp (circa 160-170bhp/ton) some of these are still better to drive than these new 400+bhp monsters.

I like it personally but i'm old and look back fondly on these things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom