ABB joins CharIN; taking Combined Charging System to the next level; 150 kW demos, targeting 350 kW
22 November 2015
The Charging Interface Initiative association (CharIN) announced earlier this month that ABB has been granted core membership in the association. CharIN was founded by Audi, BMW, Daimler, Mennekes, Opel, Phoenix Contact, Porsche, TÜV SÜD and Volkswagen to focus on developing and establishing the Combined Charging System (CCS) as the standard for charging battery-powered electric vehicles of all kinds. ABB—based in the Netherlands—is the first non-German member.
The Combined Charging System is currently the only internationally standardized charging system covering conventional (AC) and different fast charging scenarios with one integrated system approach. It combines single-phase with rapid three-phase charging using alternating current at a maximum of 43 kilowatts (kW), as well as direct-current charging at a maximum of 200 kW. (Earlier post.) The majority of available CCS charging stations and vehicles currently in the market provide direct-current charging at the level of 50 kW.
The system, which is documented within the relevant IEC and ISO standards, is endorsed by the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) and its US equivalent, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).
One of CharIN’s main targets is a significantly higher standardized CCS charging power up to 350 kW, combined with a complete backward compatibility and interoperability between available components and cars. This would significantly reduce battery electric vehicle charging times.
At this year’s Electronics in Vehicles (ELIV) conference in Germany in October, CharIN showed vehicles and equipment prepared to charge at up to 150 kW. The 150 kW demo is of some significance, as Audi of America president Scott Keogh just announced the company’s intention to build out a network of 150 kW fast chargers to support the 2018 introduction of its battery-electric SUV (the production version of the e-tron quattro). (Earlier post.)
Together with our partners in the CharIn initiative, we are fully focusing on quick charging stations that are based on the CCS standard. This method is powerful, thoroughly developed and convenient.—Ricky Hudi, Head of Development for Electrics/Electronics at Audi AG, at ELIV
The CCS is already on board the Audi R8 e-tron battery-electric high-performance sports car (earlier post) and in the Audi e-tron quattro concept car (earlier post). In 30 minutes, the 95 kWh battery of the Audi e-tron quattro concept can be charged with enough electricity for a range of more than 400 km (248.5 mi). When the battery is fully charged, it has a range of more than 500 km (310.7 mi).
Other work of CharIN includes drawing up requirements for the evolution of charging-related standards and developing a certification system for use by manufacturers implementing the CCS in their products. Based in Berlin, CharIN e.V. is open to all interested parties.
ABB’s Internet-based charging infrastructure supports all EV charging standards; the company already markets several charging stations which support the CCS standards.
At $200 per kw-hr a 95 kw-hr battery bank would cost $19,000
at $300 per kw-hr it would be $28,500.
The holy grail of $100 per kw-hr would be $9,500
Praying for cheap quality batteries.
A 150 kw charger at 480 volts would need 312 amps to provide that much power. I wonder if the supply is higher than that.
80% charge in 30 minutes means the battery bank is now storing 76 kw-hr more than before. This means effective charge storage of about 2.5 kw-hr/minute.
I would imagine the waste heat in this is quite high. I wonder what the efficiency is of this high of rate of charging.
Posted by: Jeffgreen54 | 22 November 2015 at 06:27 AM
I suppose at 350 kW you could Char it In.
Posted by: SJC | 22 November 2015 at 06:58 AM
I think the ability to drive for 2 hours at 70 mph and recharge in 15-20 minutes would be a good start.
This means a 50 KwH battery and a 150 Kw charger, both of which are practical now.
The trick is probably to get the CD of the cars very low (as Musk is aiming for) so we can get high/medium speed travel at reasonable power requirements.
You might want variable pressure tires so you can pump them up hard for a motorway run and deflate a bit for snow / wet conditions.
Posted by: mahonj | 22 November 2015 at 07:40 AM
Every other charger seems awful compared to Tesla.
This advancement gets them close on charging speed, but there's still no comparison in location, ease of use or cost.
Posted by: jackb | 22 November 2015 at 09:13 AM
I would like to see many more fast chargers in the city as well as the open road. People might put up with a 60 mile range if there is a fast charger every 5 miles.
Posted by: SJC | 22 November 2015 at 09:25 AM
200 mile batteries in mainstream price cars is a fait accompli. I'll be surprised if you see less than 100 mile EPA range in any BEV after 2017.
Ford, Fiat, Smart and Mercedes will have to give away their BEVs unless they add QC and 30%+ range. I'm guessing they'd rather sell them.
Posted by: electric-car-insider.com | 22 November 2015 at 10:01 AM
350 kW charging would mark the end for gasoline and hydrogen.
Posted by: clett | 22 November 2015 at 10:25 AM
Tesla's superchargers are 120k watt. They use thick unhandy cables to get that much power through the cable without overheating so they can keep it low tech and inexpensive. I think 120kw or perhaps 150k watt is the absolute limit with that technology. Next step is to add cooling for the cable to increase the power. Much more expensive to build and maintain the charging station. But that may enable 350k watt charging. For almost limitless charging you could use superconductors with liquid nitrogen cooling. Then a million watt would definitely be possible in a cable that can be handle relative easily. But it will be even more expensive.
However, for that to work we also need batteries that can take more charge without overheating and that have high energy density. The interesting is that Huawai seem to have developed a substance to be added to high energy density batteries so that they are also able to take a high charge something that so fart has been impossible. See http://www.greencarcongress.com/2015/11/huawei-unveils-new-fast-charging-li-ion-batteries.html
We also need better power electronics that is more compact and more efficient or it will overheat quickly at 350k watt. I do not know when we will see 350k watt charging of BEVs but it is at least 5 years away. It will come I am certain. The more important issue though is to make autonomous cars and use them to transform the auto industry from an industry that sell cars into one that sell miles from a fleet of autonomous taxis that they build, maintain, clean and charge.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 22 November 2015 at 11:32 AM
We just had a post about the 48%-in-5-minutes battery; call it a 6C charging rate. At 6C, it takes a ~60 kWh battery to absorb 350 kW. A Leaf-class battery could take about 150 kW at 6C.
If you take a Leaf and stop for 5 minutes after a half-hour of driving, you have a not-totally-impractical vehicle for longer (infrequent) trips; at $200/kWh, it's roughly $5000. The 60 kWh battery (low-end Tesla) is good for about 170 miles, so you'd stop about every 90 minutes and top up in 7-10 minutes. Lots of people stop that often for bathroom breaks. The 60 kWh battery is $12000 at $200/kWh.
What do we need hydrogen for again?
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 22 November 2015 at 12:05 PM
"What do we need hydrogen for again?" Absolutely nothing.
It's a total waste of time and by the time it would deploy to any appreciable level, batteries will be to the point that it will be even more of a joke.
At this point, hydrogen is nothing more than a distraction that slows down investment in building out EV infrastructure.
Posted by: DaveD | 22 November 2015 at 12:31 PM
A 60 kWH battery and lighter, more aerodynamic cars with low friction bearings and tires, would suit most people's range requirements nicely without all the complication and expense of quick charging. And, I believe this would push many non-tech folks over into EVs.
Posted by: Lad | 22 November 2015 at 12:34 PM
All weather extended range (500+ Km) BEVs need a minimum of 120 kWh (usable) battery back or a total capacity of about 150 kWh depending of vehicle design, size and weight. This will become a reality between 2020 and 2025 or so,
Relatively Slow charging (20+ minutes) would need something around 360 KW minimum to pick up enough energy for another 500 KM. That is now a near term possibility.
Relatively Quick charging (10 minutes) would need something around 720 KW minimum to pick up another 120 kWh of energy. This represents a much bigger challenge and will not be low cost.
Real quick ( 5 minutes like FCEVs) would need a minimum of 1440 KW charging facilities. This represent a major challenge and special cables, electronics and will cost much more.
Most, if not all 500+ KM range FCEVs can refill in less than 5 minutes and supply enough emergency power for a standard size home for up to 10 days.
Both technologies can replace our current ICEVs and will probably be competitive by 2025 or so.
Posted by: HarveyD | 22 November 2015 at 02:20 PM
Compared to a gasoline station, a high powered ev station is very reasonable
Posted by: Pinewold | 22 November 2015 at 04:46 PM
In my present ev now, mitsubishi i-miev I have a 16 kw-hr battery bank. Charging fast is desireable, but with batteries limitations on heat, I'm reluctant to charge them hard. Even with my 60 mile range, most of my driving can be done with my EV. The rest I do with my pickup truck to do the long distance driving at 25 mpg. The harder you charge your batteries, the shorter the battery life is.
Posted by: Jeffgreen54 | 22 November 2015 at 05:06 PM
Compared to a gasoline station, a high powered ev station is very reasonable
A 19 kw station would charge my car in less than an hour with its 16 kw-hr battery bank. But the trade off is less battery life. I would rather use the gas vehicle at this point than shell out $6000 dollars for a premature replacement of my battery bank.
Posted by: Jeffgreen54 | 22 November 2015 at 05:14 PM
At today's $200/kWh, 16 kWh should be down to $3200; at a near-future $130/kWh, about $2100. I think your biggest limit is going to be the existing charging system, because designing and retrofitting a high-current system for a low-volume vehicle might not have a big enough market to justify the effort.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 22 November 2015 at 08:30 PM
You keep asking for extreme needs because of your own personal situation. There is no reason you need some completely wild "1,440kW charging", or even 720kW.
You really think your time is so important that they'll invent a whole infrastructure for you to try and charge in 5-10 minutes? LOL
There are much easier solutions for extreme weather. Get an auxiliary heater that runs on ethanol or something and you don't need 500+km of range. It would be much, MUCH cheaper to add a heater that ran on a small reservoir of ethanol or something than to add another 70kWh of batteries. If you really do need to drive 300km+ every day and you really can't be bothered to spend 15 minutes to charge, then just get a yourself a PHEV and move on.
Most people don't need all that and there is no reason to slow the adoption for extreme cases or by solving the problem more affordably.
Posted by: DaveD | 22 November 2015 at 08:56 PM
@Henrik, Tesla started using liquid cooling of Supercharger cables at their Mountain View (California) Supercharger Station
Posted by: Rik | 22 November 2015 at 09:38 PM
Harvey can get himself a plug-in hybrid so he has heat in the winter.
I wussed out tonight and ran my car's engine for the first time in 5 weeks so I could clear the glass that had gotten snow and ice stuck to it. I burned a little over a quart of gas for 22-odd miles. While I only averaged 80-odd MPG for the evening, I don't consider this too bad because it's hardly an every-day thing.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 22 November 2015 at 10:46 PM
@Rik I know that. I think Tesla is working on using that cooled cable design in combination with that robotic "snake" they also develop for autonomous charging. I think in order for that robotic "snake" to handle the charging cable they need it to be thinner and more flexible so they use cooling. I think Tesla's priority is to develop a supercharging station that can automatically charge Tesla's that use the autopilot to get the vehicle in and out of the parking space that has this robotic "snake" charger. I guess Tesla is so far in that development program that we will see it rolled out to cars by an OTA upgrade of the autopilot software and some supercharger stations sometime in 2016. It will be another world first for Tesla. A car that can park and charge itself without human interaction. You just drive to the entrance of where you need to go and the car can be ordered to park and charge itself. That self-charging technology is also absolutely necessary if you want to transform the auto industry into a autonomous taxi service selling miles instead of cars. I think this is key in Tesla's long-term business plan (5 to 10 years).
There is another way to increase the charging capacity in a cable without overheating it. Increase voltage. I think Tesla is using 400 volts currently. Tesla may shift to 800 or 1200 volts in 5 to 7 years from now. That could also do the trick to get to 350k watt charging.
I think autonomous capability is a more important selling point than ultra fast charging capability. It makes more business sense to make a fully autonomous BEV than a BEV that charges at 350k watt. Autonomous taxi's will only drive say 8 hours per day. That leaves 16 hours per day for charging so 120k watt is quite enough.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 23 November 2015 at 12:40 AM
@E.c.i. when Model III and the Bolt is shown in Q1, 2016 it may have the effect that the sale of BEVs with 24kwh batteries will collapse as more people will know that much better and nearly similar priced BEVs will be on the market for 2018. Alternatively, we will see significant price drops on 24kwh and 30 kwh BEVs. If you can buy a 50kwh Bolt for 37k USD Nissan will not be able to sell a 30kwh Leaf for the same price. I expect global sales of short-range BEVs not to increase or even drop in 2016 and 2017.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 23 November 2015 at 01:18 AM
An interesting sight out here in the wild west (think central Utah, northern Nevada, parts of Wyoming, etc are signs that say "Next Fuel 120 Miles". This causes real range anxiety. A few years back, I drove about 8 hrs in western Utah and never even passed another vehicle.
Posted by: sd | 23 November 2015 at 09:45 AM
I drove a V8 Mustang in 1979 across west Utah with a 10 gallon tank getting about 12 mpg. Next gas 100 miles had real meaning.
Posted by: SJC | 23 November 2015 at 09:52 AM
Many (most) people living in large Condoniums, not equipped with e-charging facilities, hesitate to buy slow charging PHEVs because they would be driving on gas most of the time @ about 25 to 30 mpg. For them, extended range 40 mpg to 56 mpg HEVs is a better interim solution.
In that case, very quick charge (5 to 10 minutes max) extended range BEVs would be a far better clean solution. Charging facilities will soon reach 240+ KW to 350+ KW and that would do about half the job.
Of course, 700+ KW charging facilities will be developed. That could do the job in 10 to 12 minutes.
The same posters who claimed that 200+ KW and 350+ KW chargers where not possible a few months ago will also claim that 700+ KW is not possible. They will be wrong again.
To be successful, future extended range BEVs must:
1. have all weather 500 Km range
2. be able to recharge in less than 10 minutes
3. be affordable, i.e. with a total 10 year cost equivalent to similar size ICEVs.
It will come when under $100/kWh, 3-3-3 to 5-5-5 batteries become available.
Posted by: HarveyD | 23 November 2015 at 12:42 PM
For some reason, Harvey assumes that it's either impossible or prohibitively expensive to provide a standard 120 VAC 15 A NEMA outlet per space for a condominium parking garage. That's all you need to have a PHEV topped up to full charge every morning. I don't know what's wrong with Harvey.
FWIW, my gas-burning leg yesterday achieved about 33 MPG (starting from an engine at sub-freezing temperature) and the rest of my driving burned no fuel at all.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 23 November 2015 at 02:18 PM