Jump to content

edgarw

Members
  • Posts

    50
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by edgarw

  1. The 90 kWh, EQS 350+ version is available to be ordered: https://mbpassion.de/2021/11/eqs-350-nun-ab-97-80610-euro-bestellbar/ 90.56 kWh useable capacity, 626 km WLTP range, charge 10 to 80 % SoC in 32 minutes (big battery 450+ and 580: 31 minutes). My guess is, charging and range figures of 90 kWh EQE will be almost identical to the EQS 350 as it's drag coefficient might be a bit less optimal, front area a little bit smaller though, same guess for tire widths. ABRP, time to add the EQS 350+ and EQE?
  2. Found the reason: Left (first) pic, using a guide point: ABRP uses the full time until the next charging stop (or way point) to be displayed as the time from the previous point to the guide point. Then ist adds the time from the guide point to the next stop another time. In my example, it's 1h28m from Hamburg to Hanover in total, but calculated as the time needed from Hamburg to Bispingen (guide point). Then, the calculated time from Bispingen to Hanover is calculated once again and added to the arival time. On the right (second), a way point is used instead, resulting in the first time from Hamburg to Bispingen to be calculated correctly (35min rather than the full 1h28m), thus the correct times for arrival are calculated here. Unfortunately, the ABRP team doesn't seem to have picked up on this topic yet. But I see the reason, as they're busy with the redesign (which mostly, I like).
  3. Description: Once I add a guidepoint to a route, it's arrival time slips by e.g. 53 minutes Type: Webpage, App (4.0.57, Android) Link to Plan: https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=dd27c387-688b-4516-a21f-6b99e081f31f Replication Steps: choose random car chose random start- and endpoint (close enough so no recharge is needed, same with recharges though set start time to 00:00 set a guidepoint (not waypoint) somewhere on the expected route calculate route find that arrival time calculated is later than start time plus calculated travel time In my exaple, travel time is 1h28m, start time is 00:00 (12:00 AM), arrival time is 02:21 AM though. So magically, 53 minutes are added * With a waypoint rather than a guidpoint added, arrival time is correctly calculated as 01:28 AM https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=b8ba9562-ea98-49e5-956e-129f2aefd4e5 * With NO waypoint nor guidepoint added, arrival time is correctly calculated as 01:26 AM (the detour on the service station for guide- and waypoint is calculated with 2 minutes loss it seems, which is not a problem, of course). https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=dd940bbd-97c3-4da3-bca1-d65d2ae051a0 Guidepoints are points to have a preferred route being routed through, stops are not intended. For a planned stop, I'd be using a waypoint rather than a guidepoint and add a specific planned stop time. I'm sure this is a bug rather than a feature. Seen this for a long time, so I decided to post it here, because it always makes calculations difficult, when I use guidepoints.
  4. Hi, when I set charging ABRPs Mercedes EQS model (450+ in this case) from 10% to 80%, I get 45 minutes of charging time https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=c60839e9-ee42-4ee5-8963-d4779797e288 InsideEVs OTOH reports, Mercedes claims 31 minutes for the same charge and Autogefühl has even measured less than 28 minutes or the same charging process, while actually, 4% to 81% took 31 minutes - and 20...80% was done at about 25 minutes. https://insideevs.com/news/522577/mercedes-eqs-fast-charging-analysis/ Please update ABRP's EQS data! ... and while you're at it, why not add the newly (on IAA) introduced EQE? ? https://insideevs.com/news/530785/mercedes-eqe350-revealed-iaa2021/
  5. edgarw

    IONIQ 5

    Please feel free to move my post as a sub post in a new section "IONIQ 5" under "Hyundai"! I've mentioned the Kia EV6 aswell, as it's based on the same platform and shares drive trains, batteries, charging capabilities. Limted data available and a charging video with the current pre production model - all my data is from German language sources. Battery sizes: 58kWh and 72.6 kWh, both are usable (net rather than gross) capacity figures. Drive trains: RWD and AWD for both battery sizes for the Hyundai, RWD for both sizes and AWD only for the big battery in the Kia. Charging speeds at 350kW 800V HPC, peak speed is officially 220 kW for the big battery, they seem to be scaled by the size (see full charging speed 10%->80%), so max speed for the 58kWh pack should be around 176kW. Charging times 10%..80% according to Hyundai: detailed figures from https://konfigurator.hyundai.de/configure/ioniq-5/46/V1/139/trims choose "Motor" configs and look into last tab "Ihre Konfiguration" 72,6 kWh pack 800V DC HPC: 18 minutes 50 kW 400V DC: 57 minutes AC 10.5 kW: 6h15m 58 kWh pack 800V DC HPC: 18 minutes 50 kW 400V DC: 47 minutes AC 10.5 kW: 5h WLTP figures (ranges and consumptions): https://www.hyundai.de/wltp/ -> scroll down to "IONIQ 5" Charging video, preproduction car, with some data points: starts at 12% 1 min - 14% - 181 kW - 2 kWh 4 min - 23% - 187 kW - 10 kWh 5 min - 31% - 190 kW - 16 kWh 7 min - 40% - 221 kW - 23 kWh 9 min - 48% - 223 kW - 29 kWh - upto 56% 11 min - 57% - 124 kW - 36 kWh 13 min - 65% - 161 kW - 43 kWh 17 min - 76% - 152 kW - 51 kWh 18 min - 80% - 153 kW - 54 kWh - at 749V btw. Above link is from the "New Vehicle Models" section, where I first posted this, but it seems not to get much attention lately, so I've re-posted here.
  6. Limted data available and a charging video with the current pre production model - all my data is from German language sources. Battery sizes: 58kWh and 72,6 kWh, both are usable (net rather than gross) capacity figures. Drive trains: RWD and AWD for both battery sizes for the Hyundai, RWD for both sizes and AWD only for the big battery in the Kia. Charging speeds at 350kW 800V HPC, peak speed is officially 220 kW for the big battery, they seem to be scaled by the size (see full charging speed 10%->80%), so max speed for the 58kWh pack should be around 176kW. Charging times 10%..80% according to Hyundai: detailed figures from https://konfigurator.hyundai.de/configure/ioniq-5/46/V1/139/trims choose "Motor" configs and look into last tab "Ihre Konfiguration" 72,6 kWh pack 800V DC HPC: 18 minutes 50 kW 400V DC: 57 minutes AC 10.5 kW: 6h15m 58 kWh pack 800V DC HPC: 18 minutes 50 kW 400V DC: 47 minutes AC 10.5 kW: 5h WLTP figures (ranges and consumptions): https://www.hyundai.de/wltp/ -> scroll down to "Ioniq 5" Charging video, preproduction car, with some data points: starts at 12% 1 min - 14% - 181 kW - 2 kWh 4 min - 23% - 187 kW - 10 kWh 5 min - 31% - 190 kW - 16 kWh 7 min - 40% - 221 kW - 23 kWh 9 min - 48% - 223 kW - 29 kWh - upto 56% 11 min - 57% - 124 kW - 36 kWh 13 min - 65% - 161 kW - 43 kWh 17 min - 76% - 152 kW - 51 kWh 18 min - 80% - 153 kW - 54 kWh - at 749V btw.
  7. 1. actualy exists, but only for Hyundai IONIQ Electric Hyundai Kona Electric Kia e-Niro https://shop.evnotify.de/ https://shop.evnotify.de/#faq https://shop.evnotify.com/ https://shop.evnotify.com/#faq But it only works via a second cell connection and ist not exactly tiny
  8. edgarw

    charging curve

    VW ID.4 charging curve with variations, see article Charge Curve - https://www.gofast.swiss/news/vw-id4-test
  9. I believe you have coded a way too optimistic charging curve for the MX-30. According to Fastned (and YouTube CarManiac's today's video), it charges at a max of 38kW and goes down after 55%, is at below 25kW at 80% and sinks further down to 15kW at 95kW. T ome this would make for an average of something like 39kW 0..80%. Battery net capacity is somewhere close to 32kW (35.5kWh gross) according to several sources, so charging 0..80% should take about 51 minutes (using my 30kW average assumption). I've set HPC-charging from 1% to 81% in ABRP and it yields a way too sporty 35 minutes for this. Plus I assume you have calculated the battery as 35.5kWh net, which apparently is it's gross size. https://support.fastned.nl/hc/de/articles/360012887838-Laden-mit-einem-Mazda-MX-30
  10. On the recent car data update: The Ioniq 38 kWh's reference consumption gets liftet from 144 to 180 Wh/km? That's insane and far from the truth! Okay, I have it in it's older 28kWh form, yet I'm getting through ABRP auto calibration a long time equivalent of 133 Wh/km (and the 28kWh stays at your preset value of 144Wh/km). The 38kWh Ioniq is very very similar to the 28kWh version, ABRP's new 180Wh/km figure reference consumption is WAY off reality ? I'm driving on all seasons Michelin (CrossClimate+) tires at 2.8 bar btw.
  11. The ID.3 with smallest battery pack (45 kWh net) has now officially been released. Currecntly, there are three versions: Pure Performance, 110 kW, AC: 7.2 kW, DC: 50 kW City, 110 kW, AC: 7.2 kW, DC: 100 kW Style, 110 kW, AC: 7.2 kW, DC: 100 kW Charging times: at 7.2 kW, 0..100%: 7h30m at 50 kW, 5..80%: 0h42m at 100 kW, 5..80%: 0h31m Please make available a config option for 45 kWh battery pack and 100 kW charging https://www.electrive.net/2021/01/21/vw-id-3-verkauf-mit-kleinem-akku-startet/ https://www.volkswagen.de/idhub/content/dam/onehub_master/pc/models/id-3/VW-ID3-Ausstattungsvergleich.pdf https://www.volkswagen.de/de/modelle-und-konfigurator/id3.html?---={"modelle-und-konfigurator_id3_sectiongroup_7331634_featureappsection"%3A"%2F%2B%2F0"}#MOFA
  12. 3rd party navigation apps will finally be supported in AA from sometime next year (only beta before that), which will finally make it possible to port ABRP to AA - my thumbs up for that! Link is in German, see last paragraph: https://www.golem.de/news/auto-und-smartphone-google-will-android-auto-nuetzlicher-machen-2008-150207.html
  13. A real charging curve of ID.3 1st (58 kWh) https://electromobilitate.com/volkswagen-id3-1st-curba-de-incarcare/ and someone made this out of it
  14. The charging curve of an ID.3, recorded by an anonymous sender to Nextnews!. Charging start was at 43% with 67 kW, ended at 90% with just under 31 kW. Not seen on any other EV yet: the charging curve decline almost linearly, rather than in steps, so the control obviously is much finer than with any competing vehicle.
  15. Ah and at 8:46 he says that he has 3.1 bar tire pressure, Skoda standard alloy rims.
  16. Citigo-e iV (and by logic it's brethren e-Up and Mii) seems to consume way less than calculated. This guy starts at 98% and GOM 348km (claims 99% and 352km in the resumee that starts at 16:07min) in Posener Straße, Vlotho and has 30% left when charge starts at Ionity (at 15:50min). 15°C, dry road, average speed 82 km/h accorind to the app (16:53min), driving time ist 2h35m, consumption 100 Wh/km. Using ABRP, I get the same driving time with 88 km/h and 100% reference speed. 1% battery degradation (can't set 0%), With an addidtional weight of 0kg and reference consumption of 161 Wh/km @110 km/h, ABRP calculates arrival at 15%. ABRP calculates 212 km, not 210 km as he states. https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=6a8951c0-0473-4c5e-9110-79c70c39148f Changing reference consumption to 132 Wh/km @110 km/h yields the same result he achieved: 30% battery remaining https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=88081422-9cf7-440b-8163-b0b5d4af0064
  17. That'd be great, and even greater if such access would be available for VW I've received an answer, not from the developer, but from that guy in the thread. The project is inofficial, it's an API wrapper. I've yet neither found if the API is officially open, nor if it covers Kia aswell. And as I have a pre facelift Ioniq, that is not bluelink enabled in EU, I'm not able to help unfortunately, but I'll post quests for help in the Ioniq, Kona and e-Niro groups I'm in if you decide to start implementing ? https://github.com/Hacksore/bluelinky
  18. Description: In a closed facebook group, a user mentioned, that Hyundai's BlueLink can be accessed via a WebAPI. Integrating this, all (in US, from 2019/2020 models in the EU) Hyundai and KIA (I guess) vehicles' data can be accessed via that API Use Case: Car data acces Tesla style without needing to use ODBII and/or helper apps That facebook post was about this app (free and paif for version available), which uses that API. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.gotnoname.bluelinkify.free Developer's fb page: https://www.facebook.com/stianandre.thoresen A user in that discussion thread mentioned, that it accesses a WebAPI, I've asked him for info/link about it.
  19. I have contacted a ComfortCharge guy in a GoingElectric sub forum. They're building a big HPC network all over Germany at their bigger facilities, which they have a LOT of. This is Deutsche Telekom, master of German telephone and DSL infrastructure, direct ancestor of Deutsche Post. Hope you'll hear from them, I've simply postetd your "Helping ABRP - Charge Networks" and some explanations.
  20. @Jason (ABRP) nothing more specific yet, it seems. Only "so and so many km in 30 minutes" numbers, not even specifying which battery that's based on. 290km in 30 minutes for the 58kWh battery I think ... but thats's so rough, I wouldn't caculate with this. I'd have to dig for those numbers. And I'll have to change my e-mail notifications it seems ? ah there it is: "Notify me of replies" - checked! Maybe, for the small battery and 100 kW option you can for a start just take the 58 kWh curve and multiply it by 45/58 ... or something like that...
  21. Porsche Taycan 4S 79 kWh (small battery) tests: Range @90 km/h (GPS) and @120 km/h (GPS), resulting in 85 km/h and 113km/h everage (speedometer) respectively Charging curve from Ionity display: 2%: ~200kW climbs up to 28%: 223kW from 29%: 215kW from 32%: 172kW to 57%: 175kW from 58%: 160kW from 60%: 150kW freom 64%: 144kW from 67%: 135kW from 70%: 128kW from 74%: 101kW from 80%: 74kW dropping to 85%: 30kW to 88%: 28kW climbing again to 90%: 39kW+ Video stops there. Also charging at 150kW (920V) charger and 50 kW (400V) charger is recorded, at 50kW ist only gets about 36kW. Differences between Range Mode and other modes:
  22. https://www.electrive.net/2020/05/07/skoda-plant-beim-e-suv-enyaq-mit-fuenf-antriebs-varianten/ beware the 50kW DC / 7.2 kW AC for the smallest model: will be optionally 100 kW/11kW for sure, just like ID.3
  23. https://ecomento.de/2020/05/07/skoda-enyaq-iv-ausblick-auf-elektroauto-suv/ Enyaq iV 50: 55kWh gross, 52kWh net, 109kW, 340km WLTP, RWD Enyaq iV 60: 62kWh gross, 58kWh net, 132kW, 390km WLTP, RWD Enyaq iV 80: 82kWh gross, 77kWh net, 150kW, 500km WLTP, RWD Enyaq iV 80X: 82kWh gross, 77kWh net, 195kW, 460km WLTP, AWD Enyaq iV vRS: 82kWh gross, 77kWh net, 225kW, 460km WLTP, AWD All: 11kW AC 3-phase (EU) + 125 kW DC CCS, 40 minutes 10%..80%
×
×
  • Create New...