DC fast charging standards

  • Thread starter Thread starter TRSmith
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 23
  • Views Views 2K
T

TRSmith

Member
A couple of things about DC fast charging standards have been on my mind lately. It's not super relevant to the Kona, but I'm curious to see what others think or if I'm just completely crazy.

- Could other OEMs and/or charging providers adopt Tesla's charging standards? I know Elon Musk put a lot of the intellectual property from Tesla into the public domain; does that apply to the charging standards? Tesla has, by far, the biggest DCFC network, the most EVs on the road and their plug is far more streamlined than CCS or Chademo, so I wonder what it'd look like if Tesla were the main North American standard.

- Could J1772 accommodate DC fast charging? I know it's only used for AC, but does the standard include DC fast charging, without the extra pins in CCS? Or perhaps could the standard be updated (in a backwards-compatible way) to use DCFC? I just think it'd be nice to have one, compact plug to use for all charging ... like Tesla.
 
Last edited:
Nope, both of those things won’t happen, there is no way other manufacturers would switch to the Tesla plug.

Maybe Tesla would release a CCS adapter, maybe they’ll release an adapter for CCS vehicle to charge on superchargers, but otherwise it’s probably the split is probably there for good.

J1772 isn’t going to do DC charging, even type 2 ended up with DC pins.
 
Honestly, it will be CCS and J1772, now my guess is at some point Tesla will be forced by law into either coming up with an adapter or changing to CCS on their suoercharger stations, just as we have seen happen in other countries.
 
That's exactly what happened in europe. The european Model 3 comes with a CCS2 plug and an adapter for superchargers. Although they are switching the superchargers to a CCS plug. So no more Tesla-plugs in Europe at some point.
 
In NZ Model 3/Y Teslas use a CCS Combo 2 connector on the car. Model S and X come with an adapter, see image. Perhaps making SC available to all is only a matter of software configuration?

There are currently around 20 times more public Chademo/CCS Combo 2 DCFC sites across the country than the (8) Tesla supercharger sites. One advantage with the Tesla is that the cost is a fixed $0.42/kWh while the public units are mostly on $0.25/kW/hr + $0.25/min, which can resolve to $0.60 to $1.50 per kWh in practice. Tesla are absorbing much of the cost of installing charging sites, to their credit.

The few remaining J1772 AC EVSEs will soon disappear, Chademo eventually as well.
ccs_combo_2.webp
 
Last edited:
I saw somewhere that the Tesla protocol is actually very close to the j1772 protocol. Obviously including a plug & play standard which is incorporated in the newer j1772 standard as well.

So it would probably be very easy for Tesla to adapt with an OTA update.
 
Esprit1st said:
I saw somewhere that the Tesla protocol is actually very close to the j1772 protocol. Obviously including a plug & play standard which is incorporated in the newer j1772 standard as well.

So it would probably be very easy for Tesla to adapt with an OTA update.
Click to expand...
This is true for the destination EVSEs, in fact there are adapters for both directions.

The superchargers are different
 
I don't ever see Tesla being forced to accommodate CCS. The Tesla Supercharger network was put in for the express use of Tesla vehicles. It would take a lot of backbone to Congress to force Musk to use his network to be used by non-Tesla vehicles. More likely, which as pointed out, there will be movement toward Tesla to be able to use both. I don't see any reason for Musk to let non Tesla's in. Technically they are both DC fast charging but the protocols will not change and merge easy. This is where I expect the Government to step in. Since IEEE has published communication standards for DC fast charging, of course everyone is going to steer that way. Musk will hold out while his cars are still selling fast but when other manufacturers start production of large numbers of electric cars Musk may be pushed to accept the "standard". Right now CCS is "VHS" and Supercharging is "BETA". I hope "VHS" wins again.
 
GeorgeS said:
I don't ever see Tesla being forced to accommodate CCS. The Tesla Supercharger network was put in for the express use of Tesla vehicles. It would take a lot of backbone to Congress to force Musk to use his network to be used by non-Tesla vehicles. More likely, which as pointed out, there will be movement toward Tesla to be able to use both. I don't see any reason for Musk to let non Tesla's in. Technically they are both DC fast charging but the protocols will not change and merge easy. This is where I expect the Government to step in. Since IEEE has published communication standards for DC fast charging, of course everyone is going to steer that way. Musk will hold out while his cars are still selling fast but when other manufacturers start production of large numbers of electric cars Musk may be pushed to accept the "standard". Right now CCS is "VHS" and Supercharging is "BETA". I hope "VHS" wins again.
Click to expand...
Using the Supercharger standard wouldn't necessarily allow a car to charge at a Supercharger. Superchargers have plug-and-charge, so it knows whose car it is, for billing purposes. Presumably, the Superchargers would be able to tell the vehicle isn't a Tesla, so wouldn't allow a charge. This is how it works in Europe, where Tesla uses CCS2, the same standard as everyone else.
But, if Tesla wanted to open its network to other paying vehicles, it could do that if they were all on the same standard. IIRC Musk has said he'd want an OEM to help pay for the Supercharger network before allowing their cars, though.
I honestly think the Supercharger standard is superior to CCS. Smaller, more streamlined plug, everything's the same as Level 2 from the user's perspective, etc. (Not an electrician, so I don't know if there are pros/cons on the electrical level.) So the VHS/Betamax fight is an interesting comparison, since Betamax was arguably better, depending on how you judge it, but VHS won.
 
GeorgeS said:
I don't ever see Tesla being forced to accommodate CCS. The Tesla Supercharger network was put in for the express use of Tesla vehicles. It would take a lot of backbone to Congress to force Musk to use his network to be used by non-Tesla vehicles. More likely, which as pointed out, there will be movement toward Tesla to be able to use both. I don't see any reason for Musk to let non Tesla's in. Technically they are both DC fast charging but the protocols will not change and merge easy. This is where I expect the Government to step in. Since IEEE has published communication standards for DC fast charging, of course everyone is going to steer that way. Musk will hold out while his cars are still selling fast but when other manufacturers start production of large numbers of electric cars Musk may be pushed to accept the "standard". Right now CCS is "VHS" and Supercharging is "BETA". I hope "VHS" wins again.
Click to expand...
Considering the amount of tax payer money that has funded the installation of the superchargers, I could see it.
 
I think it's totally fine to have two different DC charging standards on the market. It's no different than gas or diesel, so it won't confuse people. I think three is too many and I'm glad that Nissan gave up the CHaDEMO standard in the US. Now all the existing CHaDEMO plugs need to be retrofitted to CCS and any current Leaf driver should be given an adapter plug.
 
SouthernDude said:
I think it's totally fine to have two different DC charging standards on the market. It's no different than gas or diesel, so it won't confuse people. I think three is too many and I'm glad that Nissan gave up the CHaDEMO standard in the US. Now all the existing CHaDEMO plugs need to be retrofitted to CCS and any current Leaf driver should be given an adapter plug.
Click to expand...
It is actually impossible to make a CCS to Chademo adapter due to some complicated requirements, although in theory the other way around is possible.

If they were to do this, all older Nissan's ports would have to be changed out, along with older Kia and other vehicles that used the Chademo standard. Not likely to happen without government intervention and if they do that, they might as well go all the way and require Tesla to do so as well and come up with a way for non Tesla's to pay for a charge.
 
The NZ government certainly hasn't forced anything on anyone. There are recommendations, CCS Combo 2 and Chademo for DC and Type 2 non-tethered for AC. Tesla can supply whatever they want at their own expense.

I just want to also point out that there is no such thing as "CCS2". The standards are CCS 1.0, 2.0, etc and the DC plug is "CCS Combo 2".
 
Actually the EU variant of J1772 aka Mennekes aka type 2 makes a lot more sense than the
US type 1, because you can do 3-phase AC charging at what is it, like 20 kW? without the DC
pins used at all. But for higher rates you definitely need the fatter pins, because you're shoving
200 amps or better through them. The stock J-plug pins would become fuses at that point...

I'm kind of surprised that some protocol wonk hasn't yet built a supercharger --> CCS translator.
It would have to contain the identity of a known Tesla, but the rest is just a matter of local
networking. The DC path for the electrons is just a physical connection, once you coerce all
the relays to close.

It could also provide a nice firewall level against network traffic unrelated to the charging
process, like when Tesla tries to muck with your car if they couldn't do it over the air.

_H*
 
hobbit said:
It would have to contain the identity of a known Tesla, but the rest is just a matter of local
networking.
Click to expand...

Knowing Tesla, they would just blacklist that known car id.

Clearly they have the technical capability - they did it in Europe. They just choose not to.
 
TRSmith said:
Using the Supercharger standard wouldn't necessarily allow a car to charge at a Supercharger. Superchargers have plug-and-charge, so it knows whose car it is, for billing purposes. Presumably, the Superchargers would be able to tell the vehicle isn't a Tesla, so wouldn't allow a charge. This is how it works in Europe, where Tesla uses CCS2, the same standard as everyone else.
But, if Tesla wanted to open its network to other paying vehicles, it could do that if they were all on the same standard. IIRC Musk has said he'd want an OEM to help pay for the Supercharger network before allowing their cars, though.
I honestly think the Supercharger standard is superior to CCS. Smaller, more streamlined plug, everything's the same as Level 2 from the user's perspective, etc. (Not an electrician, so I don't know if there are pros/cons on the electrical level.) So the VHS/Betamax fight is an interesting comparison, since Betamax was arguably better, depending on how you judge it, but VHS won.
Click to expand...
Tesla does have heat issues. If you watch "Out of Spec Motoring" YouTube videos, quite often his charging speed goes down because of excessive heat. He solves this with a wet rag on the plug to cool it down. Smaller isn't always better. When you charge at such a fast rate, there will always be heat generated. Electrify America (EA) solves this with a liquid cooled cable. Truthfully there isn't much difference is size if you only consider the DC part of the plug and Tesla's plug. What makes CCS larger is the J1772 part of the plug. it is AC and does not get hot generally. This is cheaper and safer for home charging. I really don't care if the world adopted Tesla plugs but I said the same about Beta. I knew it was better but they lost so I bought VHS.
 
hobbit said:
Actually the EU variant of J1772 aka Mennekes aka type 2 makes a lot more sense than the
US type 1, because you can do 3-phase AC charging at what is it, like 20 kW?
Click to expand...
Well, the older Renault Zoe can do 22 or 43kW on depending on the model but in practice many owners encounter ground fault issues and I think the methodology has not worked that well and they are now shifting to DC capability instead. European owners in some countries need 3-ph to better utilise 3-ph domestic supply limit of 16A per circuit but most of the world seems fine with 1-ph at higher amps. There is obviously an economic line to how large of an OBC an EV should carry around v.s. small DC wall units such as the Delta 25kW. The highest 3-ph standalone on-board capability I'm aware of for cars is still 11kW (i3, Etron, new Kona), again only 16 amps per phase. As such the hugh capacity of Type 2 may become redundant. Otherwise, on the commercial side it seems electric busses supplied to Australia use 2x Type2 for AC charging at the depot.

hobbit said:
I'm kind of surprised that some protocol wonk hasn't yet built a supercharger --> CCS translator.
It would have to contain the identity of a known Tesla, but the rest is just a matter of local
networking._H*
Click to expand...
I gather it's powerline ethernet so presumably can be well secured.
 
It's Homeplug greenPHY, a network RF carrier superimposed over the pilot line,
carrying a *ridiculous* stack on top of it including IPv6 and TLS. The RF piece
is originally a data-over-power thing used for home networking, but since there's
no power connection to the car until charging starts I guess the consortium
decided to put it on the pilot instead.

Tesla is some variant of CAN from what I understand but who knows what they
encapsulate over that. It may be why it was easier to build a CHAdeMO adapter
to Tesla than from CCS.

_H*
 
KiwiME said:
Well, the older Renault Zoe can do 22 or 43kW on depending on the model but in practice many owners encounter ground fault issues and I think the methodology has not worked that well and they are now shifting to DC capability instead. European owners in some countries need 3-ph to better utilise 3-ph domestic supply limit of 16A per circuit but most of the world seems fine with 1-ph at higher amps. There is obviously an economic line to how large of an OBC an EV should carry around v.s. small DC wall units such as the Delta 25kW. The highest 3-ph standalone on-board capability I'm aware of for cars is still 11kW (i3, Etron, new Kona), again only 16 amps per phase. As such the hugh capacity of Type 2 may become redundant. Otherwise, on the commercial side it seems electric busses supplied to Australia use 2x Type2 for AC charging at the depot.

I gather it's powerline ethernet so presumably can be well secured.
Click to expand...
Three phase has always been more efficient in transmission. Truth is all AC must be converted to DC anyway to charge batteries. It is also more efficient in electric motors. It just can't be stored in batteries. Don't know why the USA has not adopted it for home use except maybe complexity. Most of the time we can request three phase for our homes but it is never done as a standard. Can Australia Kona's use three phase?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top