2018 Leaf

KCross

liamog wrote: »

The Ioniq has a 31kWh battery but reports on its advertised 28kWh usable. That's 10% degradation before we'll start to see any impact. UK Leaf's reportedly degrade at 2-3% per year. That means we should only start to see Ioniqs drop below 100% after about 3.5 years.

I dont understand... the unusable bit above 28kWh isnt relevant. Why are you factoring that into the degradation figure? If the app is using that unusable bit its a BS figure... which I suppose makes sense because the Ioniq's cant really be at 100% after 3yrs.

As a reference.... the Leaf 24kWh has 22kWh usable. LeafSpy shows you the 22kWh (not 24kWh) from the start and thats the 100% mark. Once it goes below 22kWh usable the SoH starts dropping.... which is pretty much from the day you drive it off the lot although some of them start at 105% (luck of the draw).

liamog

KCross wrote: »

I dont understand... the unusable bit above 28kWh isnt relevant. Why are you factoring that into the degradation figure? If the app is using that unusable bit its a BS figure... which I suppose makes sense because the Ioniq's cant really be at 100% after 3yrs.

The Ioniq BMS is reporting a SOH figure rather than the app calculating one. If after 3 years the battery has lost 8%, the available kWh for use by the driver is now 28.5kWh (31*0.92). This is still above the advertised 28kWh capacity so reports as 100% SOH.

From a user point of view they've traded a potential extra 20km of day one range that would start decreasing from day one, for a consistent range for the first three years. As a manufacturer its probably a smart move, 3 year leases are quite common around the world, so you can clear through your initial customer with zero apparent range reduction.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

The Ioniq BMS is reporting a SOH figure rather than the app calculating one. If after 3 years the battery has lost 8%, the available kWh for use by the driver is now 28.5kWh (31*0.92). This is still above the advertised 28kWh capacity so reports as 100% SOH.

From a user point of view they've traded a potential extra 20km of day one range that would start decreasing from day one, for a consistent range for the first three years. As a manufacturer its probably a smart move, 3 year leases are quite common around the world, so you can clear through your initial customer with zero apparent range reduction.

The capacity above 28kWh is reserved to protect the battery from being overcharged. It’s not capacity that can be used as the battery degrades as you still need to keep safety.

I think you’ve misinterpreted how it works.

liamog

KCross wrote: »

The capacity above 28kWh is reserved to protect the battery from being overcharged. It’s not capacity that can be used as the battery degrades as you still need to keep safety.

I think you’ve misinterpreted how it works.

SOH is not scientifically defined, its very likely that Hyundai/Kia are using a different definition (current usable capacity/advertised capacity (capped to 100%)) versus Nissan (current usable capacity/actual capacity).

Either way, all I can say is that in the 2.5 years and 55,000km we have not noticed any drop in actual or guesstimated range. So as far as the car is usable it has the same capacity today as it was in January 2017. Would be interesting to compare against any Jan '17 Leaf's.

unkel

KCross wrote: »

I think you’ve misinterpreted how it works.

Lithium batteries suffer at least some degradation from day 1, I think we all agree on that. But I don't think there is a generic way "it works" if you are referring to reported capacity / SOH. And I believe the degradation if you keep the battery at a reasonable temp and not very close to empty or full at any time is much smaller than people thought even a few years ago.

liamog wrote: »

all I can say is that in the 2.5 years and 55,000km we have not noticed any drop in actual or guesstimated range. So as far as the car is usable it has the same capacity today as it was in January 2017. Would be interesting to compare against any Jan '17 Leaf's.

I can report the exact same although I've only done 36k km. Last time I charged up was today and the guesstimated range was 240km. I don't think I even saw that range during the fist summer when the car was brand new. And it's not like the system is now being more optimistic than it was before.

The answer must be in what liamog suggested that whatever real degradation there is, the software still keeps giving you the same usable capacity. At least for quite some time, several years.

It does imply though that the safety range of SOH is being extended, which does lead to increasing degradation

Similar enough theory to the "upgraded" software on the Leaf 30 that now shows a much better SOH

KCross

liamog wrote: »

SOH is not scientifically defined, its very likely that Hyundai/Kia are using a different definition (current usable capacity/advertised capacity (capped to 100%)) versus Nissan (current usable capacity/actual capacity).

True, its an algorithm/calculation that they can implement whatever way they like.

However, it would be very foolhardy of Hyundai to release the 3kWh of unusable capacity as the battery degrades, which is what you are saying, as it would risk their warranty as the degradation would then accelerate in later years as a result rather than slowing down. I just dont see Hyundai doing that and risking warranty on an extremely expensive component.

Maybe they release some of it, like 1kWh or something, but certainly not all of it like you suggest.

liamog wrote: »

Either way, all I can say is that in the 2.5 years and 55,000km we have not noticed any drop in actual or guesstimated range. So as far as the car is usable it has the same capacity today as it was in January 2017. Would be interesting to compare against any Jan '17 Leaf's.

My own 2015 Leaf is down 15% in LeafSpy but I dont see any major differences either other than low battery warning comes on at 20% now instead of 19%. I got 110km+ out of the car recently (on country roads obviously) and regularly see 110km+ on the GOM. So, I wouldnt expect any Ioniq drivers to notice their degradation yet as they could still be at 95% as are some 3yr old Leaf's.

We wont really know until the Ioniq drops its first bar and then we see what the app is saying.... my bet is that it will drop overnight from the 100% to 90 or 85 or whatever percentage that first bar represents in the Ioniq.

KCross

unkel wrote: »

I can report the exact same although I've only done 36k km. Last time I charged up was today and the guesstimated range was 240km. I don't think I even saw that range during the fist summer when the car was brand new. And it's not like the system is now being more optimistic than it was before.

The GOM doesnt really tell you much in relation to SoH. Its way too variable.... speed, temp, weather.

unkel wrote: »

The answer must be in what liamog suggested that whatever real degradation there is, the software still keeps giving you the same usable capacity. At least for quite some time, several years.

Or maybe that it just hasnt suffer enough degradation to be noticeable yet! :P

unkel wrote: »

It does imply though that the safety range of SOH is being extended, which does lead to increasing degradation

I doubt it. Do you really think Hyundai would risk their warranty, particularly on their first mass produced EV?
Didnt you say they offer a lifetime warranty in the US or something?

unkel wrote: »

Similar enough theory to the "upgraded" software on the Leaf 30 that now shows a much better SOH

The Leaf has 2kWh of unusable capacity (30kWh vs 28kWh). After the software update on the L30 owners reported getting back varying amounts upto 7%.... 7% would be the entire 2kWh's of unusable capacity being released..... zero chance that super conservative Nissan have done that.

It was a software bug, not actual degradation unless you're a conspiracy theorist!

liamog

In Hyundai's case, there is over provision and the capacity reserved for depth of discharge.
The conjecture is the over-provision is being released to ensure that SOH remains at 100%, not the unusable due to depth of discharge. At 100% charge (displayed to the driver) the BMS is reporting 95% charge. This is the DoD reservation, I'd agree their would be a potential warranty issue if that was reducing over time.

However, the over provision reduces warranty claims. The warranty covers 8 years, 200,000 km for 70% reduction in capacity. So long as your battery can store 19.6kWh before the warranty ends they are golden.
They've basically advertised a 70% warranty, whilst technically implementing a 63% warranty. They've also improved the user experience by giving the impression of zero reduction in range for approx the first three years.

It also took around 4 years for the first Kia Soul EVs to start reporting degradation too, the technical info re the pids comes from the say guy with the same equipment on the island of Jeju in Korea.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

In Hyundai's case, there is over provision and the capacity reserved for depth of discharge.

What do people feel is the over provision value?

Isnt it a matter of fact that the pack is 31kWh and 28kWh is usable. Are those figures debatable?

liamog

Over provision as in Hyundai advertised a 28 kWh pack versus Nissan who advertise a 30 kWh pack.
At the end of the warranty, each pack must provide 70% of the expected capacity, Nissan needs to have a 21 kWh capacity versus Hyundai having 19.6 kWh.

Nissan's range will start reducing (slowly) from day one, Hyundai can appear to be consistent for the first 3/4 years (like Kia with the Soul EV).

KCross

liamog wrote: »

Over provision as in Hyundai advertised a 28 kWh pack versus Nissan who advertise a 30 kWh pack.

Im getting more confused!
The Ioniq pack is 31kWh gross and 28kWh net. Are you saying the 3kWh difference is the over provision and is released as the battery degrades to maintain 100% SoH to the customer?

liamog wrote: »

At the end of the warranty, each pack must provide 70% of the expected capacity, Nissan needs to have a 21 kWh capacity versus Hyundai having 19.6 kWh.

Thats an interesting point alright. Nissan shouldnt really report the gross as its irrelevant to the customer. Like everything else Nissan have decided to be different in how they approach things... Chademo, gross vs net capacity, battery cooling etc!

liamog wrote: »

Nissan's range will start reducing (slowly) from day one, Hyundai can appear to be consistent for the first 3/4 years (like Kia with the Soul EV).

Well, Nissan is actually the same as Ioniq in that regard as the car displays 100% (i.e. 12 bars) for the first 3/4 years as well... the only difference is that a 3rd party decoded the Leaf CAN bus and developed LeafSpy which gives insight to the SoH that no other EV gives.

If Nissan had their time back I'd bet they would inhibit the ability for LeafSpy to exist as its a torn in their side now.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

I
It also took around 4 years for the first Kia Soul EVs to start reporting degradation too, the technical info re the pids comes from the say guy with the same equipment on the island of Jeju in Korea.

And what level of degradation did the Soul EV show after 4yrs?

The Ioniq is going to be very similar to that car if they are both using the same cell manufacturer?

liamog

Here's how I think it works in each case.

Nissan: SoH = Current Gross Capacity / Initial Gross Capacity
Hyundai: SoH = Current Gross Capacity / Initial Net Capacity (rounded down to 100%)

I'm sure that's a massive over simplification, but seems to match the observed behavior.

KCross

liamog wrote: »

Here's how I think it works in each case.

Nissan: SoH = Current Gross Capacity / Initial Gross Capacity

Nissan use the net capacity for the bars on the dash. As soon as the net hits <85% of original capacity you lose the bar.

liamog wrote: »

Hyundai: SoH = Current Gross Capacity / Initial Net Capacity (rounded down to 100%)

I'm sure that's a massive over simplification, but seems to match the observed behavior.

This is the bit that I think we dont agree on.... you are basically saying that Hyundai will release the 3kWh at the top of the charge curve to maintain 28kWh usable. I think thats very unlikely.

My alternate view is that the 100% that the torque app gives is simply a reflection that there is still 12 bars (=100%) on the dash and not the actual SoH at all. That would also "match observed behavior"!

We are both guessing of course.... we should know soon enough once a report of an Ioniq dropping a bar comes out.

Mike9832

KCross wrote: »

Im getting more confused!
The Ioniq pack is 31kWh gross and 28kWh net. Are you saying the 3kWh difference is the over provision and is released as the battery degrades to maintain 100% SoH to the customer?




Thats an interesting point alright. Nissan shouldnt really report the gross as its irrelevant to the customer. Like everything else Nissan have decided to be different in how they approach things... Chademo, gross vs net capacity, battery cooling etc!



Well, Nissan is actually the same as Ioniq in that regard as the car displays 100% (i.e. 12 bars) for the first 3/4 years as well... the only difference is that a 3rd party decoded the Leaf CAN bus and developed LeafSpy which gives insight to the SoH that no other EV gives.

If Nissan had their time back I'd bet they would inhibit the ability for LeafSpy to exist as its a torn in their side now.

Not as much known on battery chemistry for Ioniq too

It's been guessed that's its ncm523 ( higher power density/low energy density /long cycle life >3000 cycles)

With long cycle life and over 10% buffer, it's going to give good performance

liamog

Ahh OK so Nissan are reporting Current Net Capacity / Initial Net Capacity, that's probably going to map very closely to to Current Gross Capacity / Initial Gross Capacity.

Hyundai doesn't have a battery health bar.
They have a reportable SoH via GDS (the system used by Hyundai to interrogate the car). The group who did it were then able to identify the OBD PID that reports the info.

I agree that we are all guessing as to why 3 year old cars continue to report 100% health. As far as I'm aware, no Ioniq has reported less than 100% SoH, or a reduction in daily range after accounting for weather/recent driving style.

KCross

Bjorn does some good SoH tests on his cars, although not exactly scientific either but it would be interesting if he got a 3yr old Ioniq and see whether he still gets the full 28kWh usable out of it.

Another simple enough test is to run it down to turtle mode and then slow charge it to 100% and see how many kWh's it takes on board (allowing 5-10% for losses).


What % degradation did the 4yr old Soul EV have?

Mike9832

KCross wrote: »

Bjorn does some good SoH tests on his cars, although not exactly scientific either but it would be interesting if he got a 3yr old Ioniq and see whether he still gets the full 28kWh usable out of it.

Another simple enough test is to run it down to turtle mode and then slow charge it to 100% and see how many kWh's it takes on board (allowing 5-10% for losses).


What % degradation did the 4yr old Soul EV have?

Seems to start of at 110%

Damijan Hrovat - I have 76k km =47k miles on my 2016 Soul EV with SOH around 97,5% (new car/battery SOH is 110%) everyday GOM is145km / 90 miles, in summer with EV driving it goes up to 200km (my record is 247km with 14% left)

https://www.mykiasoulev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=434&start=310

KCross

Mike9832 wrote: »

Seems to start of at 110%

https://www.mykiasoulev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=434&start=310

Interesting thread. Thanks.

Seems to be a wide variation in degradation figures, even in Europe, with values from 105% down to 90% for similar aged cars. I dont know what that tells us to be honest but at least the values are moving rather than static with the Ioniq.

Stealthirl

kennethsmyth wrote: »

For reference
L40

32000kms
93.84% SOH
53 QC & 922/2 L2 charges

142 L24 with the 6.6
55,000km
average over the last year/15K km 92.3 SOH
52 QC and 2733 L1/2 [about 1800 were because i messed up trying to use the timer so it kept looking for a charge all night]

Always charged to 100% at home and 80-92% at FCP's

deep_dish

Does anyone know anything about the Air Recirculation? I want it on all of the time but when i turn off the air in general the recirculation turns off too. Then when I turn back on the air, the air recirculation stays off.

I'd like to turn on the recirculation and leave it on all day, every day, forever. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks.

highdef

deep_dish wrote: »

Does anyone know anything about the Air Recirculation? I want it on all of the time but when i turn off the air in general the recirculation turns off too. Then when I turn back on the air, the air recirculation stays off.

I'd like to turn on the recirculation and leave it on all day, every day, forever. Any advice would be appreciated, thanks.

Any particular reason for wanting air re-circulation on all of the time? This would be fairly unhealthy as you would have very little fresh air coming into the car plus humidity will quickly build, resulting in fogged up windows. AC would off-set this somewhat however I would imagine the compressor will need to run more frequently in an attempt to remove the constant excess moisture in the cabin, thereby lowering battery capacity for the drive-train.

I may be missing the point though.

ELM327

Leave off the recirc..

samih

You don't like fresh air deep_dish?

deep_dish

I drive mostly in Dublin city and surrounding suburbs. There is very little fresh air or, for the most part, the majority of air in traffic is not healthy. This has been widely reported, with recent headlines such as Poor air quality in Dublin exceeds EU safety limits.

Also it is most beneficial when using AC to recycle cold air as opposed to having to cool new air.

It's not a crazy request. This is the first car I've owned (or used) where leaving it on all of the time was not an option.

Mike9832

Stealthirl wrote: »

142 L24 with the 6.6
55,000km
average over the last year/15K km 92.3 SOH
52 QC and 2733 L1/2 [about 1800 were because i messed up trying to use the timer so it kept looking for a charge all night]

Always charged to 100% at home and 80-92% at FCP's

Thats holding up extremely well

ethernet

deep_dish wrote: »

I drive mostly in Dublin city and surrounding suburbs. There is very little fresh air or, for the most part, the majority of air in traffic is not healthy. This has been widely reported, with recent headlines such as Poor air quality in Dublin exceeds EU safety limits.

Also it is most beneficial when using AC to recycle cold air as opposed to having to cool new air.

It's not a crazy request. This is the first car I've owned (or used) where leaving it on all of the time was not an option.

I just leave the AC on all the time with recirc on when around the filthy dayyyyyshuls. Have a special filter in the car for purifying the air to catch those PM 2.5 nasties.

I think the manual says recirculation still draws in 5% "fresh" air.

deep_dish

ethernet wrote: »

I just leave the AC on all the time with recirc on when around the filthy dayyyyyshuls. Have a special filter in the car for purifying the air to catch those PM 2.5 nasties.

I think the manual says recirculation still draws in 5% "fresh" air.

Thanks, that's interesting. Leaving the AC on all of the time might be a solution. I've a charger in work so range anxiety isn't an issue.

"Have a special filter in the car for purifying the air to catch those PM 2.5 nasties"

What's this?

ethernet

deep_dish wrote: »

Thanks, that's interesting. Leaving the AC on all of the time might be a solution. I've a charger in work so range anxiety isn't an issue.

"Have a special filter in the car for purifying the air to catch those PM 2.5 nasties"

What's this?

One of these bad boys: https://airbubbl.com/
The other half (with asthma) half insists the air feels fresher.

deep_dish

Thanks. I don't do enough driving to get one of them, but it's interesting to know they exist!