Because that woud take no time at all from a user perspective. One would need only to stop the vehicle in the right place.
Do we really need another thread about the June 20 announcement? All of this has been discussed ad nauseum in at least half a dozen threads already.
Sorry for using up some of your precious internet time Mr. Fussypants, but no one forced you to click the link if you weren't interested. :)
Assumes significant extra hardware, like induction antenna and wiring into the battery through the chargers (AC input only). Hardly an easy add-on.
It will go well with driverless car. The car can drop you at the restaurant and go park and charge by itself. Well someday maybe.
The frustration with speculation is the letdown that can occur when the actual announcement is made. The Segway was thought to hover, until an announcement of scooter wheels were revealed. Induction charging is just as viable in the speculation arena as would be a battery swap. The new SuperCharger hardware that some have seen at Hawthorne is the most logical post I have read yet. I thought that Elon would hide it better, however having it visible does put it right under your nose! With that summary out of way, on to the subject at hand.
Inductive charging has been mentioned as a slower option, so I personally doubt it is going to charge the battery faster than the current SuperCharger. The fastest way to use induction is to charge as we drive. That is a way to never stop the vehicle to refill. But this upcoming announcement is about recharging faster than a fuel stop. Swapping is not technically a recharge, it's an exchange. If this announcement does not provide a faster way to push power into our existing or a new type of battery, then the language of the announcement could be a disappointment. The 120 kW SuperCharger gives 400 mph charge rate IF all conditions are perfect. That's 22.5 minutes for 150 miles. I can put 300 miles of fuel into an Escalade in two minutes at the Love's when going cross country. (I recently timed it.) The current EV recharge timing comparison has to include the added time it takes to pay, wash the windshield, stop at the bathroom and buy a snack for the drive. Unless capacitor batteries and massive power transfer equipment is used, I doubt we will enjoy a 2 minute recharge anytime soon.
Spaghetti and carefree- your posts are pointless. If you're tired of the debate, then don't engage. No-one forces you to read the thread. Simple as that.
Don't let the door hit you on the back on your way out.
Otherwise- sounds like the addition of inductive charging is no more complicated than the addition of hardware to support battery swapping.
This will not be the announcement.
Also, additional hardware will not be needed to allow for fast battery swapping. The actual time it takes to swap is about 5 minutes, not 1 or 2. All it requires is lifting the car, unbolting the old battery, and bolting on a new one. Very simple procedure. I would be impressed if they had robots do it, but my assumption is that if they do announce a battery swap option, there will be attendants doing the swapping, which makes me think you'd just stop at a service center to make the swap.
By all means, let's keep these threads going. They are very amusing and certainly are not constrained by the laws of physics. Also, in 7 days we will be able to determine who the winner was, if any.
Forums are free to all to post as you please. It is true that this topic has already been visited extensively. To summarize the inferences from elsewhere:
It will likely be a lightweight frunk range pack with Aluminum Air chemistry.
This can be put into the car in about a minute, can quickly be stocked anywhere in the country, will make current owners happy about their new extended range options, does not violate the laws of physics, requires almost no infrastructure, does not compromise the structural strength or provenance of the LiIon pack you own, is coherent with a barrage of patents filed by TM, and is sufficiently amazing that you need to see a live demo to believe it.
By comparison, the benefit of inductive charging is the elimination of plugging in the cord. The price to go cordless is high capital cost, lower electrical efficiency, and extra mass carried on the car chassis (none are good).
For those of us who have an HPWC that we've set up thoughtfully, it takes less than ten seconds to connect or disconnect in our home parking spot.
The cost/benefit ratio of inductive charging is not compelling.
But of course, logic does not have to drive one's guess. That is why the speculation is so fun, and the demo will be so eye-opening.
what about Lithium–air battery in the frunk
Inductive charging seems a long shot to me, especially the idea of pumping kilowatts across an air gap. Not sure that I'd want to sit in the car while it was happening and I wonder if my laptop would be usable afterwards - a damned big magnetic field would be involved.
Most inductive charges although not physically connected still need to be seated against each other. If there is a large air gap it would probably waste more energy in the transfer than energy for the charge. What about poor kitty that crawls under? The car either has to drop down, which may be possible with air ride mods. Or something has to come up out of the floor.
Has the thought of a drop in hydrogen tank been mentioned yet?
Inductive charging ??
I dunno - be kinda fun driving through town with silverware, coins, lawn furniture, trash can lids, etc - stuck to the sides of the car.
The air gap can be quite large, in the order of 400 mm iirc. Efficiency is reported to be ~90%, so that is quite good.
You can buy it already from Bosch: http://www.pluginnow.com/plugless
Bosch pluggless -
45 lbs total, say half is car-side mass.
Tesla HWPC -
0 lbs added to car mass
So 1/6th the power for 3X the cost to lose 10% more power than an ohmic connection. Remember you still have inverters acter the connection in both cases.
(3.3/20)(1,200/3,000)(0.90) = 6% the watts per dollar compared to HWPC.
Of expressed at constant power, (16.6)($1,200) = $20,000 equivalent cost.
Assume you redesign to optimize for 20Kw, you still have to buy a lot of copper for a huge coil to avoid saturation current, so you'll be north of $5,000 even in a very favorable case.
In general, if you already have something in the form you want, (current), you don't pay to convert it to something else (flux), and then back again.
Induction is great for smaller power levels where convenience trumps efficiency. But at 20Kw or 120Kw (SC) or higher, it's expensive and lossy.
It's far more cost effective to make an automated connector if you want the self hookup convenience.
Induction is not responsive to the goal of the June 20 event, which is to fill faster than gas.
Range packs are.
I guess people aren't as carefree as they claim.
Didn't Infinity just announce they are delaying their EV until inductive becomes more prevalent?
Inductive would be a nice feature for overnight charging in the garage, even at just 3.3kW. Just don't think I'd want to pay $3000 for it. For that, I could do some amazing improvements to my garage.
X Deutschland Site Besuchen