Tesla Motors’ Devastating Design Problem

[n2doc]

Tesla Motors' lineup of all-electric vehicles — its existing Roadster, almost certainly its impending Model S, and possibly its future Model X — apparently suffer from a severe limitation that can largely destroy the value of the vehicle. If the battery is ever totally discharged, the owner is left with what Tesla describes as a "brick": a completely immobile vehicle that cannot be started or even pushed down the street. The only known remedy is for the owner to pay Tesla approximately $40,000 to replace the entire battery. Unlike practically every other modern car problem, neither Tesla's warranty nor typical car insurance policies provide any protection from this major financial loss. Here's how it happens.

Despite this "brick" scenario having occurred several times already, Tesla has publicly downplayed the severity of battery depletion risk to both existing owners and future buyers. Privately though, Tesla has gone to great lengths to prevent this potentially brand-destroying incident from happening more often, including possibly engaging in GPS tracking of a vehicle without the owner's knowledge.

more

http://jalopnik.com/5887265/tesla-motors-devastating-design-problem

[Xipe Totec]

1. This seems... not good... nt

[TheWraith]

2. I call bullshit.

Any lithium ion battery can be damaged by full discharge, but there are safeties to prevent that. And even so, running it down to zero once is not going to kill a battery pack. This is nothing more than alarmist crap, taking a couple of incidents as an excuse to spread FUD.

[intaglio]

5. Good Grief!!!

I agree with you - about this

[n2doc]

6. 5 is more than 'a couple'

And if it isn't due to depletion, then it must be a defect and should be replaced under warranty. Tesla admits 5 cases, it is not made up FUD. Not that many Teslas on the road.

[TheWraith]

9. They don't have five examples. Actually, they only have one identified.

The other four are "allegedly," "reportedly," "apparently." "Apparently" they either didn't bother to do any actual investigation of those cars, what happened, whether they were really bricked, and if so what the cause was beyond deciding that it was Tesla's fault. Out of curiosity, if I take a brand new car and drive it 500 miles with no oil in the engine, what do you think will happen? And when it dies, will that be the fault of the manufacturer because they couldn't violate the laws of physics?

More to the point, even if we assume that that all five of the article's examples are genuine and completely valid... out of ~2,200 Roadsters sold, that represents a failure rate of 0.22%. Anyone happen to know the failure rate on new gas cars--or more importantly, the rate of people managing to destroy new cars via screwups?

This is one blogger trying to attract attention to himself by creating a story that really isn't one.

[The Croquist]

16. Please explain how a brand new car" has no oil in it

The last I knew they came with oil.

If however a gasoline powered car that ran out of gas required $40,000.00 of repairs I would question the quality of the design.

I've got a friend who is a "snowbird". His gasoline powered car and boat in NY sit for 6 months without anybody checking on them. He hasn't had to spend $40,000.00 on either yet including the purchase price.

[TheWraith]

33. If I decide to run a brand new car without ever changing the oil, or adding more...

You can bet your ass that regardless of design that car would die, period. This has nothing to do with running out of power, or anything remotely approaching normal use, and "running out of gas" is a completely false analogy.

[Xipe Totec]

41. False analogy; this is more like driving the car without gasing up.

So you get stranded on the highway. No biggie. But when you put gas in the car, presto, the car works again.

[wtmusic]

17. Exactly - I guess we blame driving without oil on a "devastating design problem".

Yes, if you're a total moron or set about to destroy an EVs battery you can probably accomplish it.

Here's an idea: morons should buy Moron Insurance instead of trying to pass the cost on to all consumers.

[n2doc]

23. So you were the one who wrote that idiotic comment on their blog?

Or just agree with it? If some manufacturer sold me a car with no oil in it I can bet you I'd win a lawsuit against them for negligence.

The real comparison was posted lower down. It is as if someone sold you a car and if you drove it until the gas ran out, you had to pay 40K to get it to run again. THAT is the comparison.

And there are different levels of failure. I truly doubt a 100K bimmer or merc ever has a 40K catastrophic failure in it's first year not covered under warrantee.

Do you work for Tesla?

[TheWraith]

35. I didn't write any comments on the guy's blog.

But thanks for the ad hominem attack and shilling accusation, it shows you've got nothing else to work with.

This has nothing to do with the condition of the car from Tesla, it has to do with the use of the vehicle by the end user. "Running out of gas" is a completely false analogy. This isn't about "running out of gas" or normal use, this is about anywhere from 1 to 5 users who managed to, by way of complete ignorance about their vehicles, damaging them. If you can't be bothered to know even the first thing about the hundred thousand dollar car you just bought, you have no sympathy from me any more than I'd have sympathy for someone who went out and bought a BMW and drove it around for a year not knowing that it needed oil changes. And you know what? I'm sure you could find 5 cases of that over the last few years, too. And yet because they're an electric car company, Tesla takes the blame for stupid people doing stupid things to destroy their cars. And yeah, you can bet your ass there have been plenty of BMWs and the like which suffer catastrophic failures from idiot owners not maintaining them and thinking they're magic. It's not really that hard, actually.

[kristopher]

43. That doesn't work either. Try this:

Someone buys a car and changes the oil at home. When reinstalling either the oil plug or replacing the oil filter they fail to torque it down consequently losing all of their oil while driving and trashing their engine.

Who is at fault?

The idea that this piece of information can't become a standard component of consumer consciousness in the same way as performing a proper oil change is a particularly absurd bit of FUD.

[Nihil]

46. Even if they have "five examples", that doesn't mean "five different owners"

I remember seeing the dreadful Top Gear "test" of the Tesla a few years
back which consisted of Jeremy "Meathead" Clarkson flooring the accelerator
while tear-arsing around a circuit until he'd completely crufted the battery.

He did that to two separate cars before completing the "road test" with many
sarcastic comments on the third.

It's quite possible that the above two were damaged beyond repair and so
become two of your five alleged examples.

Even if not, I bet that Clarkson hasn't been the only petrol-head "reviewer"
to mistreat their loaner vehicles ... which may or may not account for the
one that the blogger from the OP found out about.

[Xipe Totec]

40. Just a couple of $40,000 uninsurable losses....

We ain't talking AAA batteries here....

[hlthe2b]

3. Oh my... that will totally destroy any future, if they dont quickly address it.

[dmallind]

4. To forestall the usual panic-rumor-gossip, not an issue on most EVs

Leafs et al do not allow complete battery depletion - real life tests show about 2kwh less than capacity is available.

[n2doc]

7. A well designed EV should do just that n/t

[wtmusic]

14. If Tesla doesn't incorporate such a device on their vehicles, a recall is in order

Cheaper that, than a class-action claim.

[tech3149]

8. I call BS

I've been flying li-poly electric planes for years. Every battery controller has low voltage cutoff circuit that will not allow the batteries to be discharged to a damaging level. No engineering team in their right mind would not use the relatively inexpensive technology to protect the batteries.
To add to that, charging circuits that charge each cell only to its maximum safe potential increase expected life to their theoretical maximum.
Over the last year or so the maximum discharge rate of the batteries has more than doubled without damaging the cells.

The developments in battery technology and the existence of cost effective power systems preclude damage to the batteries by anything other than physical damage.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. I love how quickly people call any information they don’t like BS

http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-tesla-motors-devastating-design

If it’s BS, then why would Tesla bother to issue a statement like this:
http://venturebeat.com/2012/02/22/tesla-brick/

[font face=Times, Times New Roman, Serif][font size=5]Here’s how easy it is to brick a Tesla[/font]

February 22, 2012 9:44 AM
Jolie O'Dell

[font size=3]…

Here’s Tesla’s statement, which was sent to VentureBeat via email; we’re still prodding the company for more information and specifics:

All automobiles require some level of owner care. For example, combustion vehicles require regular oil changes or the engine will be destroyed. Electric vehicles should be plugged in and charging when not in use for maximum performance. All batteries are subject to damage if the charge is kept at zero for long periods of time. However, Tesla avoids this problem in virtually all instances with numerous counter-measures. Tesla batteries can remain unplugged for weeks (even months), without reaching zero state of charge. Owners of Roadster 2.0 and all subsequent Tesla products can request that their vehicle alert Tesla if SOC (state of charge) falls to a low level. All Tesla vehicles emit various visual and audible warnings if the battery pack falls below 5 percent SOC. Tesla provides extensive maintenance recommendations as part of the customer experience.

[/font][/font]

It seems clear to me that the problem is real.

[dmallind]

11. Pretty easy to seize a car by running without oil too

Does that mean it's a devastating design flaw that will bring the industry down?

[OKIsItJustMe]

13. Will you ruin that car if you don’t use if for a month?

Seriously? That seems to be Tesla’s cop-out as well.

Compare Tesla’s reaction to this:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57383011-76/tesla-downplays-danger-of-bricked-battery/

…

Nissan, which sells the all-electric Leaf, said that its battery pack never completely discharges. "One element of the battery management system is a failsafe wall that stops the battery from reaching zero state-of-charge, even after a period of unplugged storage. Globally, there are more than 22,000 LEAFs on the road that have driven more than 30 million miles, without any incidents," according to an official statement from Nissan today.

[jeff47]

48. Nissan is lying

It is not possible to create a battery that will never discharge completely.

What you can do is add circuitry to disconnect the battery from the load when it gets below a threshold. That reduces the drain on the battery but does not eliminate it.

All batteries "self-discharge". Leave the battery sitting on a shelf, disconnected, and it will eventually run out of charge. This is basic chemistry and can not be overcome.

So that Leaf can indeed survive a "period of unplugged storage". But you'll note they didn't bother to say what that period was.

If you leave a first generation Tesla unplugged with 50% charge, it takes two months for the batteries to run down. Newer Teslas would take a year, which is probably how long the Leaf would take.

[TheWraith]

12. I love how people take any reference to a story as confirmation.

If a company which made gas cars responded to this sort of story by saying "yes, you have to make sure that there's oil in the engine and coolant in the radiator," would you take that as meaning "Yes, our cars have horrible massive design flaws and we should all commit suicide out of shame."

Nothing in the Tesla response actually validates the hyperbole and shoddy reporting of this blogger.

[OKIsItJustMe]

15. Read what Tesla wrote

… Electric vehicles should be plugged in and charging when not in use for maximum performance. All batteries are subject to damage if the charge is kept at zero for long periods of time. …

OK, so, a battery is subject to damage if the charge is kept at zero, and to prevent this, the vehicle should be plugged in and charging when not in use.

I take this as an admission by Tesla that their vehicle batteries have been damaged in this way, not that they will accept any blame.

… Tesla provides extensive maintenance recommendations as part of the customer experience.

[wtmusic]

18. Here's something else they wrote...it's called an "Owner's Manual".

"Storing your vehicle
If you plan to leave the vehicle unused for longer than 15 days, it is recommended that you leave the vehicle connected to the High Power Connector and select the ‘Storage’ charge setting using the Touch Screen. When you charge the vehicle using the Storage charge setting, the vehicle is automatically kept at a reduced charge level to optimize the life of the individual cells within the Battery. Keep in mind that the reduced charge level also reduces the vehicle’s available driving range. So remember to change the setting back to ‘Standard’ before taking the vehicle on an extended drive. For details on how to select the Storage charge setting, refer to the Touch Screen Users Manual, provided in your owners package.

<>

"Note: If the Battery reaches 0% when driving in Range mode or after you’ve cycled the key to access final reserve, there is no reserve and you must charge the Battery immediately. FULLY DEPLETING THE BATTERY WHILE IN RANGE MODE OR IN RESERVE, AND NOT CHARGING IT IMMEDIATELY, CAN DAMAGE THE BATTERY.
Caution: Damage to the Battery caused by failing to charge it immediately when its charge level falls to 0% is not covered by the New Vehicle Limited Warranty. If you are unable to charge the vehicle, contact Tesla Motors immediately."

Why should they accept blame for idiots who can't understand how to maintain their $100,000 toy?

[OKIsItJustMe]

21. This is a far cry from saying the the problem doesn’t exist.

A $100,000 car should not become useless if you turn your back on it for a couple of months. Car owners are used to storing their cars for extended periods of time, without them suffering any ill effects.

As a designer, you have to anticipate this sort of thing.

Further, Nissan addressed the problem, rather than blaming their customers.

If a $30,000 car has addressed this problem, shouldn’t a $100,000 car be expected to?

Why should they accept blame for idiots who can't understand how to maintain their $100,000 toy?

Are you saying that EV’s are “toys?”

[wtmusic]

22. Well I guess an EV is different than an internal-combustion car, isn't it?

I find it amazing (and humorous) how some can't avoid shoving EVs into the gas-guzzler mold, then freaking out when they behave differently. These are the people calling Tesla Customer Service with questions like, "Where does the oil go in this thing? How come I can't hear the motor running?" etc etc. Billionaires who treat their investment like a toy, then cry when they break it out of carelessness. Whaaa.

No, as a designer you don't have to anticipate people's stupidity - especially with cutting-edge, first-adopter technology. Read the &$@! manual.

[OKIsItJustMe]

26. Sorry, that doesn’t cut it

I design things to be used by real people, who I know don’t read manuals. Personally, I read manuals, but I realize that most people do not.

You’ve got to expect that an electric car owner will treat their car like they have treated other cars.

RTFM is the cry of a poor designer.

[wtmusic]

28. Then I would suggest you don't buy one.

You will be very unhappy when you break it. Just stick with tech you're familiar with, things used by "real people".

[OKIsItJustMe]

30. Seriously?

The equivalent consumer-level product (the LEAF™) doesn’t suffer from this problem. To my way of thinking, that means the LEAF™ is better designed.

Of course, if Tesla doesn’t want to sell cars…

[wtmusic]

32. The Roadster also predated the Leaf by three years

and uses a complicated system using over 6,000 cellphone-capacity batteries. Why? Because safe, large-format Li-Ion was not available in 2008.

It's a remarkable feat of engineering they not only got the car to work, but sell over 2,000 of them. The first modern electric vehicle available for sale - as for early-adoption, it doesn't get earlier than that.

I have no idea if this configuration makes them any more "brickable". But despite what the article cited in OP says, I would be amazed if the Model S doesn't have a similar safety net against discharging.

[AtheistCrusader]

34. Nissan uses weasel words.

If it is not charged for a 'period of time'. How long is that? I guarantee, if you run the leaf down to 'user perceived zero', and then park it for a long enough period of time, it will eventually hit true zero.

How long is that, and does the Tesla have a slimmer margin of error? Impossible to say at the moment.

[TheWraith]

36. File that under "No shit."

Anyone who knows fuck-all about rechargeable batteries can tell you that draining them to zero and leaving them there is the fastest way to damage a Lithium Ion battery. Is Tesla supposed to accept responsibility for the fact that some people decided their cars ran on magic? Or for the fact that Tesla batteries don't ignore the same basic laws of physics that every other battery has to work with? It's no healthier for a rechargeable battery to be left on zero power than it is to run a car with no oil in it. This isn't rocket science, and it's not a "design flaw."

[kristopher]

19. Why don't you stop spreading FUD about EVs?

I know you are intent on promoting fuel cells but I thought you had some integrity. Judging by your recent crusade against battery electric where you freely distort information, I'm starting to think I was wrong in my assessment.

[OKIsItJustMe]

20. I’m not spreading anything

Anytime anyone says anything you don’t like, you attack their motives.

[kristopher]

24. Yes you are.

Anytime anyone points out a clear trend in your comments and posts, you want to assert that your motives have no relevance. They do. Spreading false information or distorting information with the intent to create false beliefs is a human act that has its roots in motive. Motive can often be established by a pattern of behavior.

It isn't an "attack" to point out that pattern.

[OKIsItJustMe]

27. This isn’t my thread

I simply pointed out the the problem is not BS.

[kristopher]

29. No, you joined the effort to spread FUD

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11277571#post10

I'm sure you know the "Are you still beating your wife?" tactic for smearing someone, right?

Your post #10 is an obvious part of such an effort. A hyperbolic claim is made. Tesla denies it. You used the denial as proof of the validity of the claim.

Where is the honor in that?

[OKIsItJustMe]

31. Thank you for (once again) telling me what my intentions are

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1127&pid=7573

2. I call bullshit.
Any lithium ion battery can be damaged by full discharge, but there are safeties to prevent that. And even so, running it down to zero once is not going to kill a battery pack. This is nothing more than alarmist crap, taking a couple of incidents as an excuse to spread FUD.

… Electric vehicles should be plugged in and charging when not in use for maximum performance. All batteries are subject to damage if the charge is kept at zero for long periods of time. …

It appears their safeties are insufficient.

You seriously mean to tell me that you think having a 100,000 car die, because it sat in a garage unattended too long is acceptable?

[TheWraith]

38. Since you appear to want to drag me into this sub-thread...

Yes, there are safeties. And I have no doubt that those safeties are sufficient for the 99.8% of people who did not manage to fuck up their cars. I also have no doubt that this person referenced in the story--and the other four, if they actually exist--did considerably more to damage his car than is accounted for here, such as running it down to zero multiple times, and probably also leaving it there for quite some time. Under those circumstances, no battery will survive, but it's easier and more satisfying for the owner to blame Tesla and claim it's a design flaw than to accept personal responsibility for the fact that they fucked up.

Putting your objection into other words, "You mean to tell me having a complex device fail because the user abused it and ignored the most basic maintenance is acceptable?"

Or let's analogize it to existing technology: "You mean to tell me that having a $100,000 car die because the owner drove it for a year without ever changing the oil is acceptable?"

There are only two conclusions here: some people are horribly spoiled by the assumption that technology is just going to take care of itself and they never have to do anything about it, and some others are using this as an excuse to spread FUD.

[OKIsItJustMe]

47. I didn’t really intend to “drag” you anywhere

I was simply showing one of the multiple posts I was responding to.

I don’t think that letting a car sit idle once is abusing it.

http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-tesla-motors-devastating-design

[font face=Times,Times New Roman,Serif]February 21, 2012
[font size=5]“It’s A Brick” – Tesla Motors’ Devastating Design Problem[/font]

[font size=3]…

A Tesla Roadster that is simply parked without being plugged in will eventually become a “brick”. The parasitic load from the car’s always-on subsystems continually drains the battery and if the battery’s charge is ever totally depleted, it is essentially destroyed. Complete discharge can happen even when the car is plugged in if it isn’t receiving sufficient current to charge, which can be caused by something as simple as using an extension cord. After battery death, the car is completely inoperable. At least in the case of the Tesla Roadster, it’s not even possible to enable tow mode, meaning the wheels will not turn and the vehicle cannot be pushed nor transported to a repair facility by traditional means.

The amount of time it takes an unplugged Tesla to die varies. Tesla’s Roadster Owners Manual {Full Zipped PDF} states that the battery should take approximately 11 weeks of inactivity to completely discharge {Page 5-2, Column 3: PDF}. However, that is from a full 100% charge. If the car has been driven first, say to be parked at an airport for a long trip, that time can be substantially reduced. If the car is driven to nearly its maximum range and then left unplugged, it could potentially “brick” in about one week.[font size=1]¹[/font] Many other scenarios are possible: for example, the car becomes unplugged by accident, or is unwittingly plugged into an extension cord that is defective or too long.

When a Tesla battery does reach total discharge, it cannot be recovered and must be entirely replaced. Unlike a normal car battery, the best-case replacement cost of the Tesla battery is currently at least $32,000, not including labor and taxes that can add thousands more to the cost.

…[/font][/font]

This (to my mind) is a serious design flaw.

Has it happened to 5 people?

…

Of the approximately 2,200 Roadsters sold to date, a regional service manager for Tesla stated he was personally aware of at least five cases of Tesla Roadsters being “bricked” due to battery depletion. It is unknown if there are additional cases in other regions or countries.

…

Assuming this statement is not a complete fabrication, it has happened to at least 5 people (probably more.)

[tinrobot]

25. Tesla could warranty this issue away if they wanted.

They could nip this in the bud by doing what Nissan and GM does with their batteries - 8 year warranty on the battery.

If the rumors are false, no big sweat for Tesla. If true, then they'll replace a few batteries and save themselves company killing publicity.

[TheWraith]

37. So Tesla should pony up $40,000 a pop because of the user's negligence?

Should the maker of my car pay to replace the thing if I'm too stupid to understand basic care like oil changes, and I blow out the motor?

[bananas]

44. Absolutely yes they should.

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/gm-unveils-8-year-chevy-volt-battery-warranty/

[hunter]

39. Maybe set it up so a self-powered car alarm fired off when the charge got too low...

WAAAAAAAAHHHHHH!!!!!!! PLUG ME IN NOW!!!!!!!!!

It could even launch a long extension cord out onto the sidewalk.

[Nihil]

45. It already does the first bit ...

> Maybe set it up so a self-powered car alarm fired off when the charge got too low...

See the Tesla statement excerpt in .10 (I think) above:
>> All Tesla vehicles emit various visual and audible warnings if the battery pack falls below 5 percent SOC.

Personally, having seen how some people can ignore flashing lights, alarm sounds
and large-lettered warning notices because they are too stupid/lazy/malevolent to
take action, I am totally with Tesla not replacing the batteries being destroyed in
this manner.



Let's face it, if they are so mindless with their $100K car, I dread to think how badly
they must drive *any* vehicle on the public road as they appear to be sensory-deficient
to an extraordinary degree ...

[IDemo]

42. Considering that the battery management and motor control systems have a long history,

this is surprising, if true. Most folks aren't aware that the Tesla control system traces its roots back to the ones utilized in the famous EV1 and later in the T-Zero, engineered by Alan Cocconi of AC Propulsion. The battery management system monitors temperature, current and voltage for the 6831 lithium ion cells comprising the battery.

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/tesla-ceo-nissans-leaf-battery-is-primitive/

http://www.teslamotors.com/roadster/technology/power-electronics-module

[TreasonousBastard]

49. Seems to me that if you don't want a $100,000 brick...

under even the slimmest of chances, there are plenty of other $100,000 cars you can buy.

And most people who can afford a car for a hundred grand do have other cars in the garage-- ones better suited for trips to the airport where there is no charging station.

(They can afford to take limos, too.)

[NYC_SKP]

50. Such are the problems with emerging technologies.

And a big thank you to all who purchased Tesla Roadsters.

I feel pretty confident that the S and X models won't be released until this problem has been addressed at least as well as Nissan has done with their Leaf.