Thanks for taking the time to do this. It’s an interesting way to meas battery health without app/software.I’m going to try it myself. I wonder if Volvo has the tech to do this via software at the service centre?
Hej Bjorn, nice results. I think that the data you generate should be analyzed similar to the way we do in analytics. Because every measurement system has variation (it's natural, no way around it) and readings at both low and high SoC suffer most from this (I heard that you realize this in the early stage, but it is also true at the end). I do agree that you should run the test as you do, in fact, the 90 kmh test is perfect. One measurement point every 10% SoC (SoC and average usage). When I analyze this statistically, the range is linear (correlation coefficient is 99%), and the battery capacity as calculated from the whole measurement series is 74.9 kWh. This number is now more reliable than calculating it from only the last point. If I do the same for the 120kmh test, the linearity is still good (98.3%), and the calculated battery capacity is 72.0 kWh. So to me as an analytical scientist, the actual loss in capacity is 3.9% (72 vs 74.9), which is more logical as well I would say. Would love to share my graphs to show you more, just do not know how to reach you best for that. Let me know if you would like that, and if you have similar data from previous tests (like the XC40 or others) I would be happy to look at them. I could create a template for you as well where you can just enter the measurements every 10% SoC (5% would be even better) and see what comes out at the end. To my opinion that would improve your tests and give some extra insights where you can now just speculate or reason. Best! Johan
Hi, I love your video on TESLA 3 RL so much that I plan to buy it in Thailand this year. What do you think of buying one from new factory in Germany? Are they different from China?
@@bjornnyland Thanks, Bjørn. Am thinking that their not supporting ABRP in the Volvo makes me feel I should wait and see. Thanks too for all the vids - it’s mostly because of you I bought an EV!
2 роки тому
These tests aren't possible at home for me, cause I'm living in the mountains so there is regen which add some more kW to the battery
Hi Bjørn. Is it correct that for both tests in this video the weather and temperature were roughly similar and the battery ended at 4%, yet the mileage achieved had this big a difference: 90 km/hr yielded 354+ km and 120 km/hr yielded 246+ km? It seems like a huge mileage difference for only a small speed difference if correct. Thanks!
Air resistance increases with the square of velocity, so a 25% increase in speed is a 56% increase in drag (1.25 * 1.25 = 1.5625). That ups the power usage considerably. Edit to add: The aggressiveness of the cruise control in trying to maintain speed will affect this as well. Does it stomp the accelerator to instantly make up the difference when the car encounters a small rise in the tarmac or a gust of headwind, or is it more gentle?
These were not strictly the 90 and 120 km/h tests. That's why the results never ended up in my table. Remember that this test focuses on measuring battery capacity, not range.
Just following your own comments on the video, and in the generic sense, how much can we trust the average consumption reported by the car, in order to generate values like battery capacity, or even range? I've giving you this consideration, as from my time of ICE cars, really, the average consumption given by the car, was less than trustworthy. This is not a critic to your excellent work, function of what the cars report back to us, but a lack of trust on whatever information that they provide (diesel gate for the win). I guess that some of the Apps that get information from the OBD port, give us a basis to compare what the on-board computer reports on the instrument panel, against OBD readings. But even so, still not sure if the values read via the OBD port, are not "calibrated" to the OEM's "convenience". I have no good suggestions on to go around whatever misinformation provided by the car/OEM, but independent measurements, like the ones performed on the wireless charging losses test on the I-Pace, could be a go way forward. But of course, that the dealerships, will not allow the cars that they lend, to be rigged with several instrumentation, that could expose their eventual misinformation.
Thanks for taking the time to do this. It’s an interesting way to meas battery health without app/software.I’m going to try it myself. I wonder if Volvo has the tech to do this via software at the service centre?
Another informative and enjoyable video, Bjørn. Nice use of the new Stormberg window shades in the closing remarks!
as a tech kind of guy, I really find this interesting!
Its correct, it was a software update. Some Weeks ago, that was about about the capacity.
This would be software right. Also would this mean the the xc40 awd and fwd would have improved range via these updates?
Hej Bjorn, nice results. I think that the data you generate should be analyzed similar to the way we do in analytics. Because every measurement system has variation (it's natural, no way around it) and readings at both low and high SoC suffer most from this (I heard that you realize this in the early stage, but it is also true at the end). I do agree that you should run the test as you do, in fact, the 90 kmh test is perfect. One measurement point every 10% SoC (SoC and average usage). When I analyze this statistically, the range is linear (correlation coefficient is 99%), and the battery capacity as calculated from the whole measurement series is 74.9 kWh. This number is now more reliable than calculating it from only the last point. If I do the same for the 120kmh test, the linearity is still good (98.3%), and the calculated battery capacity is 72.0 kWh. So to me as an analytical scientist, the actual loss in capacity is 3.9% (72 vs 74.9), which is more logical as well I would say. Would love to share my graphs to show you more, just do not know how to reach you best for that. Let me know if you would like that, and if you have similar data from previous tests (like the XC40 or others) I would be happy to look at them. I could create a template for you as well where you can just enter the measurements every 10% SoC (5% would be even better) and see what comes out at the end. To my opinion that would improve your tests and give some extra insights where you can now just speculate or reason. Best! Johan
I have the c40 and I love it, but it doesn’t get anywhere close to what the factory says.
Hi, I love your video on TESLA 3 RL so much that I plan to buy it in Thailand this year. What do you think of buying one from new factory in Germany? Are they different from China?
Did you hook up your OBD dongle to get any info? Am interested. Because I ordered an XC40 and don’t know about compatibility.
I don't have any apps that supports Volvo/Polestar.
@@bjornnyland Thanks, Bjørn. Am thinking that their not supporting ABRP in the Volvo makes me feel I should wait and see. Thanks too for all the vids - it’s mostly because of you I bought an EV!
These tests aren't possible at home for me, cause I'm living in the mountains so there is regen which add some more kW to the battery
That's not how it works.
Hi Bjørn. Is it correct that for both tests in this video the weather and temperature were roughly similar and the battery ended at 4%, yet the mileage achieved had this big a difference: 90 km/hr yielded 354+ km and 120 km/hr yielded 246+ km? It seems like a huge mileage difference for only a small speed difference if correct. Thanks!
Air resistance increases with the square of velocity, so a 25% increase in speed is a 56% increase in drag (1.25 * 1.25 = 1.5625). That ups the power usage considerably.
Edit to add: The aggressiveness of the cruise control in trying to maintain speed will affect this as well. Does it stomp the accelerator to instantly make up the difference when the car encounters a small rise in the tarmac or a gust of headwind, or is it more gentle?
These were not strictly the 90 and 120 km/h tests. That's why the results never ended up in my table. Remember that this test focuses on measuring battery capacity, not range.
@@KevinT3141 Thanks Kevin, I did not know the mathematical relationship, learned something new from you
@@hakonhalvorsen5984 And it's all Bjørn's fault. :-)
Just following your own comments on the video, and in the generic sense, how much can we trust the average consumption reported by the car, in order to generate values like battery capacity, or even range?
I've giving you this consideration, as from my time of ICE cars, really, the average consumption given by the car, was less than trustworthy.
This is not a critic to your excellent work, function of what the cars report back to us, but a lack of trust on whatever information that they provide (diesel gate for the win).
I guess that some of the Apps that get information from the OBD port, give us a basis to compare what the on-board computer reports on the instrument panel, against OBD readings. But even so, still not sure if the values read via the OBD port, are not "calibrated" to the OEM's "convenience".
I have no good suggestions on to go around whatever misinformation provided by the car/OEM, but independent measurements, like the ones performed on the wireless charging losses test on the I-Pace, could be a go way forward.
But of course, that the dealerships, will not allow the cars that they lend, to be rigged with several instrumentation, that could expose their eventual misinformation.
👍😊