Grab our RSS Feed

AND

How Will the Volt’s Battery Perform at Different Temperatures?

July 11th, 2008 | Posted in: Battery, Climate

Some may have noticed an anonymous “Battery Expert” made an appearance in some of our previous posts’ comments sections. He/she claimed the Volt’s batteries might not survive their lifecycle requirements at different temperatures. It is he/she who created the graphic shown above.

Not being a battery expert myself, and seeking clarification of this issue, I went to my own anonymous source who is indeed a verified PhD lithium-ion automotive battery expert intimately knowledgeable about many of the current automakers projects, including the Volt. He had this to say:

“Battery life will be shortened when exposed to high temperatures… as is the case for all
chemistries including Lead, NiCd, NiMH and Sodium. Initial findings indicate that most Li-Ion
cells should be able to go the distance of 10 years while only losing ~20% of their capacity even
at a steady temperature of 30*C. This is due to normal electrolyte corrosion and breakdown issues.
Most climates and driving habits will keep the cells below the aforementioned 30*C, insuring
good battery life for a vast majority of owners.

Obviously, under more stressful driving and desert climates, the cells may loose more than 20%
of their original capacity in 10 years. The automotive engineers are aware of this and some
“oversizing” is being specified to give consistent performance to the owner of the PHEV/EV. It is
still prudent to keep the car in a garage rather than parking it on a blacktop driveway in the middle
of summer.

All Electric Range or Effective Electric Range can be reduced, particularly in extreme cold
conditions when the Li-ion battery has some difficulty in accepting rapid charge from regen
braking. This is due to the inability of the SEI layer and carbon based anodes to accept the Li
ions, and some degree of Lithium plating occurs… much like in cell phone batteries that are
“quick charged.” Under warmer conditions it is easier for the Li-ion cells to deliver full AER
as the cell’s internal impedance is lower and full power can be delivered or accepted over a wider
range of SOC.

Even after the cells lose 20% capacity, the PHEV/EV is still quite drivable and useful. The AER
may start to reduce, but this is similar to fuel economy degradation in a 100,000 mile used gasoline
powered vehicle.”

Further, this same commenter also claimed Dr. Nazri, an advanced battery scientist at GMs R&D department “does not trust this at all” when it came to battery durability. I contacted Dr. Nazri, and his reply:

“This is absolutely false, and I have not made any comment of this sort. This kind of false fabrication may not help reputation of your organization. I am Volt enthusiast myself.”

It looks like our “Battery Expert” really is fabricating things other than batteries.

Posted by: Lyle

155 Responses to “How Will the Volt’s Battery Perform at Different Temperatures?”

canehdian Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 6:55 pm

As long as it lasts the winter of Canada, I’ll be happy

(First first post! whoo!)

Also: I thought the pack will have significant temperature control systems (aka cooling).
That prevents overheat in the summer, and the opposite happens in the winter – cooling is slowed. If its plugged in and charging, temperature change will be minimal (heat generated in charging) and once it gets moving and using the battery, it will heat up slightly as well, same with energy regained with regen braking.

(Quote)
noel park Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:00 pm

Well here in good old SoCal, where everybody knows that there is only one season, we don’t worry too much about such things. Anyway, I didn’t pay to much attention to “Battery Expert”. When the rant level goes above a certain intensity, I just sort of tend to tune it out.

Anyway, thanks for this new thread. Something which actually delves into the technical issues surrounding the Volt makes a soothing and comforting change from the wisdom of Mr. Wagoner.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:16 pm

I like the analogy of decreased AER from an older battery pack being similar to fuel economy degradation from an internal combustion engine. These latest battery chemistries shouldn’t be useless by any means even at the end of their “life.” They will still be reasonably powerful and efficient…much like an ICE is still reasonably powerful when it gets older. No worries here.

(Quote)
kent beuchert Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:19 pm

The public at large knows from nothing about either batteries or electricity. Ditto the media. They compare power generation technology on the basis of “rated capacity per kilowatt” , a totally
meaningless measure , but one that Fortune used last week in an
article. It’s downright pathetic. No wonder the public is so dumb. Look who’s giving them their information. And 12 more outlets claimed that the Volt “just downsized the fuel tank” : the reason : “to save weight and get better mileage. ” It’s a losing battle. The media is simply not competent to cover any technical subject. These people are JOURNALISM majors.
Not particularly bright journalism majors.

(Quote)
Jason M. Hendler Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:24 pm

It’s funny to see an anti-battery person on this site, as they usually are anti-hydrogen.

Be wary of posters who intend only to demoralize fans of the Volt, as they are very subtle, behaving as if they are helpful.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:29 pm

Lyle,

Ordinarily I’d think…P.D.F.T.T with a topic like this. But…you did your homework by contacting Dr. Nazri, so I’ve got to hand it to you.

I’ll say it again, the way this troll was fishing for test data, makes me believe there’s some nervousness in the competition. Perhaps he thought that someone on this forum had a connection.

We all know that one giant Asian car manufacturer openly stated that Li-ion couldn’t wouldn’t happen. It’s got to really sting when a competitor pulls it off!

(Quote)
Vincent Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:30 pm

Bravo Lyle!
(He/She/It was BS at best)

(Quote)
tom harwick Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:44 pm

“”"It looks like our “Battery Expert” really is fabricating things other than batteries.”"”

This assertion is not supported by your reporting.

Your own source stated that a battery will lose 20% of its charge at 30C = 86F

The guy you acuse of fabrication produced a graph showing a battery losing 26% of its charge at 98 F. These findings seem consistent. The findings of your expert are better interpereted as confirming rather than disproving the battery expert.

Sorry to sound harsh, but if you are not able to handle this simple middle school level data analysis, you should find somebody who can,

(Quote)
N Riley Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 7:52 pm

Lyle,

I had stated on the posting that my doubt-o-meter was registering pretty high with this “battery expert”. Thanks for following up and proving this guy as a naysayer who is out to throw cold water on the Volt project. We should expect many more of these types as the Volt moves closer to production. There will be some who will persist even years after production – just like the EV1 crowd who can’t let go.

Thanks again, Lyle. We really appreciate the great job you are doing and the service you bring to us as well as to GM. I know we appreciate you and I do believe GM does to (or they better).

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:01 pm

Uh, I didn’t bother reading the clearly trollish posts from the other thread. Is there actually anything backing up this graph? Like…data? I could’ve made the same thing in MS Paint for crying out loud. Unless there is some credible source behind those curves (I mean actual data we have seen, not just a guy swearing that he does have data) I don’t think that plot should be granted a spot at the top of a new topic. Maybe if he was nice and open-minded about it that would be OK…but he clearly posted this information in poor taste and should not be rewarded for such behavior.

(Quote)
Lyle Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:02 pm

Tom-
I was simply was referring to the fabrication of statements from Dr. Nazri, the rest speaks for itself.

(Quote)
Jim F. Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:04 pm

It appears to me that the Volt team is well aware of the limitations of Li-ion batteries. That is why they maintain the charge between 30 and 80 percent and have a cooling system for the battery. These provisions will enable the battery to last a minimum of ten years and still achieve close to 40 miles on battery power.

(Quote)
Statik Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:05 pm

Lyle, this is one of my favourite posts from you. I have to say. Taking someone up on a issue, tracking down the facts…getting confirmations. Then starting a whole thread on it. Good on you.

My favoUrite part:

“Further, this same commenter also claimed Dr. Nazri, an advanced battery scientist at GMs R&D department “does not trust this at all” when it came to battery durability. I contacted Dr. Nazri, and his reply:

“This is absolutely false, and I have not made any comment of this sort. This kind of false fabrication may not help reputation of your organization. I am Volt enthusiast myself…It looks like our “Battery Expert” really is fabricating things other than batteries.”

Some battery facts you can debate, as it is a unproven commodity in the hands of the public, but running Dr. Narzi down and get a direct quote is totally…and I am going to use my own ’scientific internet phrasing’ here…’covering him/her in pwnsauce’

+1

#11 Lyle:
“Tom-I was simply was referring to the fabrication of statements from Dr. Nazri, the rest speaks for itself.”

Don’t even bother to respond further to accusations about your statment…it speaks for itself.

(Quote)
RB Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

#8 Tom — With greatest respect, it seems to me that the assertion that Expert is fabricating things other than batteries is fully supported. Specifically, Expert claimed falsely that Dr Nazri made statements that Nazri denies ever making, and with which, Lyle reports, Nazri does not agree.

(Quote)
Joe Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:18 pm

Two nights ago, I listened to the Dan Rea Show, coming from Boston like many others have done, and found it very interesting. I like hearing Lyle without any static as experience from previous interviews. One caller I especially liked was Nasaman… being I know he blogs on this site. One thing Nasaman said is that he has had conversations with Bob Lutz and has gained privy information of the Volt project. Nasaman has reiterated the battery is solid. That gave me a good feeling coming from someone who sounds very credible.

(Quote)
Battery Expert Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:37 pm

Nazri should be careful about his comments, I can specify the time (what date, what time, the exact GPS location of the conversation, I can remember he was facing Southeast and his clothes was short shirt in very light color ( maybe slightly yellow). anyway, let’s forget about this and hope GM will succeed, I agree that even after the battery lose 30% capacity, there is still big commercial value in the battery and GM should take this into consideration when it comes to pricing: should they rent it? should they take the battery back when the car is totaled due to mechanical problem…….

(Quote)
MDDave Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:39 pm

It is still prudent to keep the car in a garage rather than parking it on a blacktop driveway in the middle of summer.

That’s an interesting statement as it has some impact on the idea of putting solar panels on the roof of the car and parking it out in the sun. What you gain in solar-generated electricity, you may loose in battery efficiency and longevity.

(Quote)
Grant Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

Thank you for the clarification, this sort of battery performance actually fits far more with what I know of my own Li-Ion powered stuff then the claims earlier.

While various self-proclaimed ‘experts’ may loose their self-endubbed titles as time goes on, I will still happily share my own title of ‘Grand Expert of Useless or Erroneous Information’ with anyone who wants it. All you have to do to merit it is know something either true but rather pointless, I.E. “Box turtles can be sexed by eye color, Red is male, Yellow is female.” or something wrong that still sounds good, “Chihuahua dogs are closer related to rats then wolves.”

Seriously, though, thank you for the update and explanation, facts help me make good buying choices.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 8:47 pm

Nice to see someone being taken to task. My impression after reading the article is that the “Battery Expert” may have exagerated somewhat and apparently lied.

The issue with Dr. Nazri saying “This is absolutely false, and I have not made any comment of this sort. This kind of false fabrication may not help reputation of your organization. I am Volt enthusiast myself.”, would appear to tell us that the batter expert was lying. I might be willing to concede he (Battery Expert) was lying, BUT Dr. Nazri works at GM. Do you think he would have told Lyle “Oh, yes I really think the batteries are useless, we might as well throw in the towel”. I am not saying that we should not believe Dr. Nazri, but also, I will not blindly ignore the facts.

I was also a little distubed by this seemingly trifle statement:
“The AER may start to reduce, but this is similar to fuel economy degradation in a 100,000 mile used gasoline powered vehicle.” I am not an auto expert, but the mpg on my 12 year old car, with 186,000 miles, has not noticeably decreased. I never heard of this phenomena until now.

Nice article though…

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:01 pm

MDDave

I like your point.

Prospective Volt buyer at dealer:
“Hi, yes I love that little battery powered car. Oh, yes please add the cool “green” solar panel”.

GM Salesman:
Yes, you can buy the optional solar panel for (insert outrageously large $ amount), but please don’t park the car in the sun.”

Prospective buyer:
Can I drive it in sun?

GM Salesman (person, sorry I know women sell cars also):
Only if the temperature is below 98 degree F.

Ok, this went a little to far, but just wanted to added a little comic relief.

(Quote)
Mark Bartosik Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:04 pm

In the graph the vertical axis denotes 2400mAh, that’s typical of a AA consumer cell (like you buy at Radio Shack or the super market). So I suspect that the graph is accurate for a consumer AA cell of unknown origin. One of the Volt’s cells would be higher capacity.

IF the graph is for a AA cell then…
I don’t think one can extrapolate testing a AA Radio Shack cell to a large format purpose designed cell from A123. Sure there will be similarities but there will be large differences too.

It is like comparing a cheap cell phone camera to a 10MP digital SLR, or a bicycle to a motorbike, or a dingy to a yaut.

Indeed it is about of sensible as plugging in 300 AA cells from Radio Shack into your Volt, Mr Battery Expert is welcome to try this with his Volt, but I’m not going to follow his leed!

(Quote)
Anthony BC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

Can I be the “Battery Expert” next week?

I work at Honda and would like to get in on some of the GM battery bashing.! LOLOLOL !!!!

Way to back it up Lyle,

GO GM, GO VOLT!

(Quote)
Mark Bartosik Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:21 pm

Volt’s cell size will be more like 45 to 50Ah (50,000mAh), not 2400mAh. Apples and Oranges comparison. Do A123 or LG even make cells with a capacity of 2400mAh, and if so do they use anything like the same chemistry as automative cells?

Even the now nearly ancient Honda Insight uses 6500mAh cells (Panasonic NiMh D cells). So it would even be a little unfair to use this graph for a Honda Insight.

RE #22 – Antony BC
No – because I want to be “Battery Expert” next week, you can have the following week

(Quote)
kubel Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:22 pm

For the record, Battery Expert said, “Recently I talk to Dr. G. Abbas of GM, who does not trust this at all, he told me people should and will have to tolerate the facts that battery won’t last 15 years and battery failure risks will always be there.”

What exactly is Battery Expert getting at here, assuming this quote was legitimate (which apparently is not). I never heard GM once claim the batteries would be fail-proof and last greater than 15 years.

I read bits and pieces of “Lithium batteries: science and technology”, a book by Dr. Nazri, and I found no such doubts. In fact, and the end of the book, he was very optimistic about Li-ion, saying, “There is no doubt that this system will very soon find its place in the industrial battery market… Ultimately, Li-ion large batteries are expected to be competitive with today’s common systems on the basis of life cycle cost”.

Sounds to me like Dr. Nazri is a fan of Li-ion, which is probably why he’s on the Volt team and is a fan of the Volt himself!

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:29 pm

“Can I be the “Battery Expert” next week?”

Not until you convince GM to drop the prismatic cells in favor of the AAs above, that way everyone can charge their Volt in a Ray-o-Vac charger.

If you can just do that you wouldn’t need to convince anyone that you’re the battery expert!

(Quote)
gsned57 Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:31 pm

To Jason M. Hendler at # 5 it sounds like you were talking about our friend Statik

” they are very subtle, behaving as if they are helpful.”

Well at least the subtle part and being helpful although I think he wants the Volt to succeed as much as the rest of us, I gotta say, battery expert was anything other than subtle and people like that tend to thrive on pissing others off. The problem with the way battery expert did it, was that he/she didn’t really do it in a very convincing way.

Lyle, sorry you felt you had to respond to battery expert but I think we all agree that if nothing else it educated us a little bit on the technology, which honestly is what I’m most interested in and why I keep coming back to this site.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Mark Bartosik says: “I don’t think one can extrapolate testing a AA Radio Shack cell to a large format purpose designed cell from A123.”
————————————————————————————-
Battery Expert’s tests related to a small A123 cell. I forgot the exact A123 model #, but you can check the original post from Battery Expert if you want. Given this is all true, then there’s no reason you couldn’t scale the results to A123’s larger cells with the same chemistry.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:39 pm

#19 JEC says, ““The AER may start to reduce, but this is similar to fuel economy degradation in a 100,000 mile used gasoline powered vehicle.” I am not an auto expert, but the mpg on my 12 year old car, with 186,000 miles, has not noticeably decreased. I never heard of this phenomena until now.”

———————–

I haven’t either. My Hyundai Elantra has 166,000 miles on it and gets 35 MPG and runs like it was new.

(Quote)
Rashiid Amul Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:42 pm

I don’t care who becomes the “Battery Expert” as long as I can retain the well respected, prestigious title of “Hot Air Expert”.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:43 pm

Dave G #27

Didn’t Bart Riley of A123 tell us that they worked closely with Conti on the pack, even tweaking the chemistry so that the pack performed optimally?

(Quote)
Karl Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:46 pm

what about -30*C?

(Quote)
Joshua Bretz Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:50 pm

A123 has 60C life data on their website:

http://www.a123systems.com/#/technology/life/lchart3/

(Quote)
Battery Expert Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:55 pm

Someone from a big American company will NOT tell you or media what he is really thinking because of obvious consequency, but however, when Nazari talk to people who actually know the battery, he let his guards down, as nonsense to someone who knows the topic well will be laughed at and repudiated as c**p. Lyle, you get sth from Stanford that Si based battery can increase KW/Kg by 10 times, yet one author says that claim is rediculous. Did you ever contact Jeff Dahn about that claim? Did you ever think about this? The huge volume expansion of Si anode simply makes the Si battery impossbile w/o adding diluent. The Si wire also has much lower density that 2.3g/cm3 before lithium insertion (1.3 g/cm3 estimated from the pictures)? The random orientation of Si wire also has very poor packing which dramatically reduces its efficiency?????
I do not want to reveal the time, location, date, etc of when Nazri said such st***d thing, I do not want him to get fired by GM, let’s stop here, OK? I am lying OK? And the real lier will die tomorrow, OK? And I will die tomorrow, OK?
The real reason I post the unpopular stuff here is because I hate the facts there are so much dishonest claims in the battery field, Yes, A123’s battery (26650, which is where the posted data come from) cyclability is the best I have ever seen. I have not seen, nor tested 32 series battery. But I know the trick A123 get high rate (>3 KW/Kg) is difficult to duplicate (I am NOT saying impossible) in 32 series unless A123 figured out a way to use a machine to put multiple tabs on the electrodes (Japanese has difficulty in doing this). A123 hired cheap chinese labor to hand-made mutlple tabs in the 26650. If you hand-made multiple tabs in 32 series, cell consistency will suffer and result in poor durability of the battery pack.

Oh, yes, everybody say LiFePO4 is cheap, however it is not that cheap yet, the synthesis requires innert atomsphere (Hydro-quebec use hydrothermal, but performance not as good as A123 yet). Also the cell fabrication is difficult due to poor adhesion.

In the winter or in the summer (in Arizona), unless you charge the battery right before you start the engine, BMS has to drain the battery in order to warm-up or cool down the battery to 30-35C, and that sacrifice a lot of energy, which reduces range.

I never said that PHEV can NEVER be successful, but successful commercialization is very very very difficult, due to technical, commercial difficulties, and deserves far more attention, high-quality engineering, NOT hypes or non-sense crafted by MBAs. I have to admit that I really admire Toyota for their conservative attitude and I only buy Toyota (They did not even give me an interview last october due to my immigration status, but that is fine).

You guys can take me as a lier in anyway you want. May I ask you to save my post and read it again in 2012.

Thank you very much!!!

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 9:56 pm

31 Karl

I believe (maybe a battery expert can confirm this), that the battery will not degrade at cold temps, but it will affect the performance. At higher temps the chemistry of the battery apparently causes irreversible damage to the battery pack. The cold temps would affect things like charge cycle time and depth, but these would recover as the battery warms.

Also, I know GM does not want to give out to many secrets, but what in the article really address’s the graph posted? Without something to compare, it really tells me little.

One more comment: What did Battery Expert do to cause Lyle to directly confront his postings? Is there “more than meets the eye”? (Which takes me back to Transformers, and now we hear GM is going to possibly place the Volt in the next Transformer movie. I feel like this thread is taking me somewhere…but not sure where?)

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:01 pm

The small A123 cell referred to above is a 26650 format, I think. I forget the exact number but it’s the cell found in all those power tool battery packs and R/C vehicle packs. Therefore it’s not hard at all for anyone to pick up a few cells and test them. Nominal capacity is 2300 mAh. For the record, it’s significantly larger than an AA cell. It’s closer to a C cell, but somewhat longer. But looking at the big picture it’s still a small cell, yes. R/C users have thoroughly pummeled this cell (hopefully I will get the chance to do so someday) and it is a true powerhouse, and very difficult to kill. I know someone in an online R/C community that got a pack up to 190+ degrees F in a high-powered electric drag truck, and it still works fine. Hence my belief that the A123 chemistry would be sound in the Volt. I hope LG’s cells have similar characteristics.

50 Ah? Not too shabby…can someone remind me of how big the A123 Volt cells are?

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:08 pm

This not an argument for ICEs…but let’s be fair here.

Degrading performance of an ICE can be avoided by regular tune-ups; however, no “tune-ups” are required (or possible) for the battery pack. Even with regular tune-ups, the performance of an ICE will eventually degrade by some level.

An ICE can be “rebuilt”…in other words, some value still exists in the ICE. A battery pack with significant degraded performance can not be “rebuilt”. And, little or no history exists in the aftermarket of automotive hybrid batteries. The best arguments that I’ve heard for affordable replacement of degraded hybrid batteries…hybrid batteries will be less expensive in the future due to volume and tech advances. These reasons have some level of uncertainty…like predicting house values. Of course, a salvaged battery pack can be used, but some risk level exists with this solution.

Based on my info, I would compare the replacement of a degraded Volt battery pack comparable to a small airplane engine overhaul (a significant percentage of the vehicle’s blue book value). And, a battery pack will probably need to be purchased from GM.

The total cost of ownership can only be determined in the “real world”. A problem is that most people get “sticker shock” with high cost parts like the battery pack.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:09 pm

Battery Expert

I am not calling you liar. I think everyone who posts here adds something, and your post obviously struck a chord with others.

I believe you have factual information and you know your business. No need to be upset at others or worry about what other think of you. Just post what you believe is factual and valuable to Volt community, be it supportive or critical of GM

We all need to digest and process your inputs along with everyone else, and try to form our own opinions.

Don’t stop posting if you think your right. If you are posting false information, then you have to answer to yourself if it is really something you want to spend your time on (not sure why anyone would want to waste their time and others with known false info)

You decide for yourself what you want to do. Not others.

(Quote)
Morgan Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:18 pm

33 Battery Expert:

Where is your paper published?

I don’t need to know that you buy only Toyota’s, that I need to save your post so I can say “he was right” in 2012, or that you are calling out a friend who is undoubtedly reading what you are writing at this moment and is unlikely to be your friend (most scientists or engineers I have met in my life really really prefer to be hunkered down when the “MBA” types walk into the door) now that you have shone a spotlight on him.

All I need to know is: which journal is your paper published in and why have you not submitted anything to Consumer Reports et al?

I can do the math myself thanks, just show me your paper and not a graph. Show me your experiment, control conditions, and a peer reviewed paper.

Thanks in advance.

(Quote)
Battery Expert Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:22 pm

Nazri said that c**p privately where everybody is more or less an expert. I resent dishonesty intensively, here is the reason: Dishonesty will indirectly destroy my future, where my expertise will be of little use and I am forced to change my career because the nonsense hype in the battery technology today means severe underfunding of this technology (related R&D) in the future. One example, those who did superconductive materials 15 years ago suffered greatly from the fall-out of the hype. I am sorry to post sth that undermined Dr. Nazri. Battery field is small and people may know each other well. I do not want to get too ugly. It is up to you to decide if I lied or NOT. Thank you and bye for ever.

(Quote)
frankyB Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:37 pm

OMG… more babeling about battery specs and performance without having access to the real data.

It’s not even a question of who is right or wrong, it’s about pseudo-insider thinking THEY know it all while they don’t have access to the research. If all the data was made public, ANY competitor could copy what they are doing.

So until then, just wait and see before trashing or hyping something you can’t really know since you don’t have access to the research.

(Quote)
R.V. Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:39 pm

No don’t, don’t say “for ever” Battery Expert Guy.

We…we’ll forever miss you Gattery Bexpert Euy

(Quote)
LyleL Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:40 pm

The following quote is why I would not be in favor of battery pack swapping for repair or otherwise. The cars owner would have no idea how the replacement battery pack was treated. That puppy could have been beat to death in street races, had a cell failure, come back in under warranty and get put in my car under a warranty pack replacement and possibly turn up with reduce range in a few years. I’ve always stayed away from buying a used sports cars because of the reasons above.

“Obviously, under more stressful driving and desert climates, the cells may loose more than 20% of their original capacity in 10 years. “

(Quote)
Mike756 Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:41 pm

“It is still prudent to keep the car in a garage rather than parking it on a blacktop driveway in the middle of summer.”

Hmmmm. What about parking lots?

I guess we should cover them with solar panels.

(Quote)
Adam Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:41 pm

A couple of things bother me. I was going through all the prior posts on batteries, and there was a graph that indicated GM only plans on charging the pack to 80%.. Then SOC will be no lower than 30%, but this I understand.. OK, I can roll with that. What bothers me though, they claim a 20-30% decrease in cell capacity. Seems as if the consumer is getting the shaft again…….

I don’t know why they would want the SOC to be no higher than 80%… I didn’t read the posts, I probably should, I may do that after I write this. Anyway, the volt is going to get 40 AEM, and a (couple?) years it’ll drop, just say 25%? Now it does 30 miles? 40 miles is a good thing, and a lot of people will praise GM for that, but seriously though, possibly 30 miles?

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:49 pm

#40

I agree.

Most people just want to know about the overall specs. One of the big items being discussed here is the storage and operating temperature range of the battery pack. A more general spec would be the temperature range of the entire vehicle. Since the battery pack is the concern, it should be discussed specifically.

Has GM released this spec? If so, any recommendations to extend the life of the battery pack? For instance, a climate controlled garage.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 10:57 pm

Adam #44

“I don’t know why they would want the SOC to be no higher than 80%”

*** *** ***

No one is getting the shaft. The 80% limit on the full charge is to allow some capacity for regenerative braking.

(Quote)
koz Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:02 pm

I looked at BE’s graph the other day it was linked and didn’t see the same concerns, rather it looked reassuring:
-no thermal control
-3.7V – 2.2V – 3.7V cycling (100% or more battery capacity)
- ~25% degradation after 1000 cycles at 98f ambient
- ~2.3Ah, 3.2V cell would require 2173 cells to make 16KWh pack
-5A discharge (~35KW equivalent Volt battery pack discharge rate)
-2.3A charge (~16KW equivalent Volt battery pack charge rate)

Given the stated specs and expected use of the Volt battery pack, this only reinforces GM’s claims for the battery pack especially given relatively gentle treatment it will see.

(Quote)
jeremy Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:04 pm

if someone took the battery expert job next week..
can i be arch next week? lol
hes a real hero.. g i archy! lol jk
but about the posts.. i belive lyle had a slow media day so he posted about battery expert ..
eitherway i hope the batterys to hold up better then a normal battery in our flash lights sigh ..
GO VOLT

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:15 pm

#39

Unbelievable that someone could compare the ramp-up and temperature control engineering challenges for proven smaller scale Li-ion technology with a 20 year old theory (superconductivity) that never materialized a single product. That would be like equating the chances of successfully pulling off the Volt’s battery to the potential success of Eestor. Ridiculous.

Ok…who was next in line to be battery expert? I’m turning over the GPS, compass, textile guage and color chart to you! (#16)

(Quote)
Morgan Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:17 pm

39 Battery Expert:

Come on man…ultimatums and innuendos are horrible science.

Are you a private or university (public) researcher?

If you are public it should be no issue whatsoever to direct us to your published findings or at least your experimental controls and procedures.

if you are private I can’t believe you aren’t wanting to use your experimental info to tear your competition a new one (A123 and CPI are hyping these batteries as much as GM)

(Quote)
DonC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:18 pm

Our battery expert has a point about Dr. Nazri. No one holding a job like his at GM can publicly question the Volt battery. That would be professional suicide. (It is my opinion that it is unprofessional to quote someone’s casual remarks in an intimate setting in a public forum when you know it will put him in an awkard position — but that is an entirely different topic).

Alternatively Mr. Nazri may have said something that our Battery Expert misinterpreted. For example, the quote as initially given referenced a battery with a life of 15 years. Maybe Mr. Nazri was suggesting he didn’t trust the battery to last so long. I wouldn’t think this is surprising — GM is more or less saying the same thing by shooting for a 10 year life.

Or perhaps Mr. Nazri was saying he didn’t trust it to last because of the possibility that other parts of the battery pack, like the connectors, might fail, a possibility which in my mind is more likely to be a problem than the chemistry part.

For these reasons I think “liar” is harsh, and I think Lyle, as head of this site and the unquestioned leader of Volt Nation, might use slightly softer language had he to do this over again. (He needs to be more restrained than posters).

Obviously BA can’t give you his resume without revealing his identify, something he obviously doesn’t want to do. I doubt he has anything to do with Toyota though. It hardly matters, but my guess would be a foreign graduate student or newly minted PhD. (he is definitely not Japanese).

The big question for me is: Is this really that big of a deal? This challenge to the battery didn’t seem that consequential to me. GM is confident enough to go to production. Granted it’s a production run of 10,000. But you have to have some level of confidence to make that type of commitment. Having 10,000 lemons on your hands would be a complete disaster. I can’t believe a corporation would play this type of Russian roulette. I think they believe it will work per spec.

In the same vein, the engineers who are working on the car are responsible if it doesn’t work, and I am sure they fully understand how a battery failure would affect their careers. If they think it will work then why worry about someone who isn’t that close to the product questioning it?

This is one of those times when trusting the market and people’s sense of professional self-preservation makes sense. Trust the Volt Luke … whoops, wrong movie!

(Quote)
Morgan Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:21 pm

49 Grizzly:

Actually they just discovered some amazing superconducting materials at ridiculously high Tesla and a workable temperature (LN range I believe). (important for electricity conduction and really powerful magnets) this material was discovered independently in both Japan and the US.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:33 pm

DonC #51

The point is that if this technology was so phantom, then why do Tesla, Phoenix, Mercedes Benz, Fiskar, and Mitsubishi, to name a few, have products either on the design table, or planned for release? In the case of Tesla, we’re even talking about archaic chemistry that will be covered by their BMS/TMS.

(Quote)
Arch Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:37 pm

I love it! The dogs are moving in. You should have been there in the 70s when one of the dogs was GM. LOL

Take Care
Arch

(Quote)
Brad Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:39 pm

I guess this would mean that having solar panels on the roof simply to control cabin and battery temperature would be very useful. I wonder what is cheaper – a larger battery to make up for the loss or solar panels to maintain temperature.

(Quote)
Battery Expert Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:40 pm

I have made and are continously making batteries using anode which provides much better longevity than both A123 and LG, with 30% lower energy density compare to A123. I have 3 friends at Samsung and Hyundai doing battery work, so I have evaluated many batteries from A123 and LG extensively. It is common practise in this business to study the products from your competitors. One reason I do not like A123 is they should have made cells in Japan or Korea, not China or India. I have visited China twice and utterly shocked by the quality standard there, but A123 seemed to have done a good job with quality..

(Quote)
Arch Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:50 pm

Battery Expert

LOL

Arch

(Quote)
Anthony BC Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

If I am elected “Battery Expert” for next week, I will do my part in promoting the confidence of Li-Ion for the VOLT as DonC #51 wrote “GM is confident enough to go to production for 10,000 VOLTS. But you have to have some level of confidence to make that type of commitment. Having 10,000 lemons on your hands would be a complete disaster.”
Let’s wait until the product ships, then BLAST IT when it all fails, or PRAISE it when it succeeds! – GO GM, GO VOLT!

(Quote)
Morgan Says:
July 11th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

56 Battery Expert:

Then forgive me for saying this but….

Is your company lacking qualified marketing and sales people?

If your company has a longer lived battery and you have lab tested proof that the A123 battery won’t do what GM and A123 say it will your PR staff should be on the phone poste haste with “10 years? don’t think so, however OUR battery as you can see on these graphs performs at a much better longevity and would be perfect for the BEV market”

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:05 am

#56 Battery Expert
“I have made…batteries…which provides much better longevity…with 30% lower energy density compare to A123.”

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:06 am

#56 Battery Expert
“I have made…batteries…which provides much better longevity…with 30% lower energy density compare to A123.”

Wouldn’t higher energy density be better?

(Quote)
DonC Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:12 am

Grizzly@#53

You misunderstand me. I have complete confidence in the technology and in GM’s ability to deliver it in the Volt.

My point is if everyone who has professional skin in the game — from the engineers working on the project to Lutz to the Board of Directors — believes it will work, why worry when some random person who isn’t directly working on the project questions it?

Put another way, do you think GM will produce a car it knows will not work? I don’t.

(Quote)
terryk Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:22 am

Someone lacks attention at home.

(Quote)
koz Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:22 am

#51 Don C
“GM is confident enough to go to production. Granted it’s a production run of 10,000. But you have to have some level of confidence to make that type of commitment. Having 10,000 lemons on your hands would be a complete disaster. I can’t believe a corporation would play this type of Russian roulette. I think they believe it will work per spec”

Perhaps they’re enjoying the current NiMh recall so much they want a repeat experience with the Volt’s battery. GM doesn’t deserve a pass here just because they are big, have been engineering cars a long time, or the risks are so high. There past prformance hasn’t been steller and they should be (and I believe they are) making extra efforts to mitigate the risks.

BE raised a ligitimate concern about the relation of battery life and ambient temperture, but unless I’m missing something that data doesn’t reinforce those concerns.

BE,

By the way, was Dr. Nazri interviewing with your company at the time of your encounter with him? If not, I fail to see how your withholding of the details of your meeting protects him after you’ve already called him out with your previous post.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:28 am

DonC #62

I understand what you’re saying, it’s just that my post didn’t exactly follow it up very well. I agree with your previous post completely. The point I didn’t make very well was that viewed from another perspective this could hardly be considered “voodo” technology since so many participants are already in the game, and I have no doubt they’ll come through.

For example, It’s not as though Phoenix motorcars has an ulterior motive, they’re in business to produce EVs and they’ll be using Altair nano’s batteries. They would not be using these if they didn’t think they’d last or weren’t up to spec. The Altair Nano battery won’t even use a TMS. Regardless of whether or not anyone thinks their chemistry is better or worse than A123’s, we’ll call them even, how on earth could anyone think it’s such a stretch that the much larger GM can’t make it work/last with a TMS (thermal mgmt system)??

The straight answer is they can and will!

This is why B.E. is nothing but a troll.

(Quote)
The Grump Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:28 am

#39 Battery Expert – “Thank you and bye for ever.”
#56 Battery Expert – “I have made and are continously making batteries using anode which provides much better longevity than both A123 and LG, with 30% lower energy density compare to A123. ”
——————————————————–
They just don’t make “forever” the way they used to. It used to mean never, ever again. Must be that “new math”.

Look, you set yourself up for a mauling when you called yourself “Battery Expert”. It’s like saying “I’m the greatest (fill in the blank) in the world”. This lack of humility upsets some people, and they will take it out on you.

It would have been easier to call yourself “Battery Guy”, then justify your expert status by posting links to data that backs up your claims. Right now, you have a big name, a lot of fancy words in your posts, but no data to back your impressive title.

You ask us to accept you on faith, and your big words. However, many of us have had our faith stretched to the breaking point by Bob Lutz and Co., bouncing around our hopes and dreams around like so many rubber balls. We don’t have much faith left. So tempers flare, and feeling get hurt. It’s hard waiting on a supercar that may be further delayed, or never come at all. I know I’m tired of waiting.

My advise? Pick a new name, one that’s a little more humble. Then dazzle us with your proof, not just words.

(Quote)
LazP Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:31 am

I personally believe that GM knows what it is doing. If they do not have appropriate stability testing on such a key component as the battery, they will not be able to produce this car. There is apparently plenty of skeptics out there about the whole E-REV concept mainly because of the lithium battery. The “hale Mary” comment by Ford and even Toyota and Honda. I have looked at Ford’s current approach, they are taking a lot slower tip-toe approach working with UC Davis group. They project a 10 to 15 years until the get to where GM is trying to get with the Volt in 3 to 5 years. I have made negative comment about the “Battery Expert” previously. I now changed my mind. I do believe he is legit. However, I also believe that he has an agenda otherwise he would not use this Fan site to post this type of warning, I also think the GM researcher’s name should not have been used by that poster. I was flabbergasted when I saw his actual name mentioned. This controversy is unnecessary here. GM will find out soon enough if they have battery problems. They could not afford to bring the car out with clouds hanging over the Volt battery.

(Quote)
LazP Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:50 am

I am a retired chemist and (my company) supplier to GM for many years having spent plenty of time in GM’s foundries to get out products qualified. Let me assure you all, they will not approve an imprortant component without extremely thorough testing. I would not worry too much about the battery if GM will bring out the Volt. Simple elementary failure to me is inconceivable if the car is marketed.

(Quote)
DonC Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:01 am

Grizzly@#65

That’s a great point. Yes, not only do we have GM saying it will work, we have other maufacturers as well, such as your example of Phoenix Motorcars.

I am sure that the Volt will have its share of problems. There is a learning curve. It may even be that there are battery problems. But my guess is those will turn out to be something about the connectors or that kind of stuff, not the battery chemistry, since that will have been well tested.

In this regard, aren’t there still RAV4 out there with NiMH batteries still running after ten years? I haven’t really reasearched this, but my impression is that the batteries are lasting longer than anticipated.

(Quote)
GM Tester Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:37 am

GM will have a few hundred Volts running all over the country and on closed tracks (24/7) for at least a YEAR before any Volt is sold. Any durability issues will be solved. Also, I am not sure the final battery choice will be Lithium-Ion, it might be some derivative like Lithium Polymer or some kind of different anode material.

It looks like I might need to get a custom-made insulated car cover when I park my Volt outside in the Texas Heat during work if it will prolong bat life.

(Quote)
Best Battery Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:44 am

By 2012 everybody will know who makes the best EV battery. Word will quickly spread who is most reliable when all those different vendors hit the road at the same time.

Or maybe NOT.

Who makes the best AA battery today ?
EverReady,RayoVac,Energizer,Panasonic,Duracell…???
I think they are all pretty close to each other.

(Quote)
Speed Racer Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:54 am

Warning to Battery Makers: DO NOT put your battery logo on the outside of any of these EVs that will be sold to the public. Here is what will happen: The first EV that becomes disabled on the side of the road will soon have many photos appearing all over the internet for your viewing pleasure, and it will not be pretty. Do you really want photos of broken-down EV with your company logo proudly displayed. I THINK NOT.

(Quote)
Ryan P Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:54 am

#51 Don C:
“Trust the Volt Luke!”

HA HA! That’s priceless!!! Luke… I am your… farad.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:01 am

I’m guessing that Dr. Nazri isn’t so hard up for work that he would would lie to save his job. I’ll bet he is very employable and could find good employment elsewhere.

I think we have experts agreeing that heat affects batteries, and disagreeing on the extent. It sounds more like an academic argument than a practical one. I’ll bet the disagreement stems from miscommunication/misinterpretation and could be cleared up if the parties spoke. Another way to clear this up is for others that were privy to Dr. Nazri’s alleged misrepresentations to chime in. Since, “Nazri said that c**p privately where everybody is more or less an expert,” I’d like to hear from the others that were in the room.

Battery Expert: get your colleagues to rise up against the alleged threat to your collective livelihood. The “voices” of additional informed supporters would help your cause.

(Quote)
Jerry Jones Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:01 am

Has anyone ever heard of “naming rights”. They use this in sports facilities to offset the enormous cost of building new stadiums. For example: The new $1.1 billion football stadium here in Arlington, Texas is expecting to get $600 million just for “naming rights” from one company alone.
What if Chevy sold some kind of “advertising rights” on some portion of the Volt (like rear bumper) to OFFSET COST to the public. If this could be done, would anyone ride around with a “PEPSI” logo on the back of your personal vehicle if it reduce your cost, say $5K ???
Just a thought.

(Quote)
Ryan P Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:04 am

#56 Battery Expert:
“I have visited China twice and utterly shocked by the quality standard there, ”

You got that right. I just watched on TV tonight, Ted Koppel’s “The Peoples Republic of Commerce” show, episode three, all about Chinese automakers. (Geely, et. al.) He interviewed an american doing business there who said “If you don’t watch them every second of every day they’ll try to get away with anything”

BTW did you know the prestige car in China now is the Buick?

(Quote)
Richard Petty Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:09 am

Introducing the GM Chevy Exxon/Mobil Volt !

Yeeehaawww, that must be one of them thar ‘neck cars.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:41 am

LazP #68

“Let me assure you all, they will not approve an imprortant component without extremely thorough testing. I would not worry too much about the battery if GM will bring out the Volt. Simple elementary failure to me is inconceivable if the car is marketed.”

*** *** ***

I like your optimism, but regrettably I’ve got to remind everyone about the Cobasys Nimh batts in the Saturn Vue hybrid. Not exactly sure what the failure rate is but it’s high. I do not believe that this is because the battery was poorly engineered, but rather because I suspect GM shouldn’t have chosen Cobasys as the supplier. Too much history, and too little focus and effort on execution and production, especially when one of your parent companies is none other than big oil. Poor choice of supplier IMHO. What was GM thinking?

I want to stress that I don’t think this casts any shadow on the Volt. I believe that they’re fully aware of the Vue and have learned and will take the necessary steps to make sure that this particular problem doesn’t repeat itself. I’m guessing this is more of a corporate (Cobasys) failure than a battery failure. One step of course is not to choose Cobasys as a supplier, and for the Volt…I don’t see them on the roster! Honestly, I think that both CPI and Continental are up to the task of producing the battery for the Volt. LT, I think it’s a safe bet that both will be used for the Volt and E-flex.

(Quote)
Nixon Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:02 am

In #36 Jeff said “An ICE can be “rebuilt”…in other words, some value still exists in the ICE. A battery pack with significant degraded performance can not be “rebuilt”.”

I’m envisioning degraded battery packs being re-tasked, not rebuilt.

Here is how I’m hoping it will play out: Buy a Volt, and drive it for 10-15 years, and your battery loses XX% of it’s performance. Then you yank the battery and tie it into your home solar/wind system as a backup battery. Or you sell it to your neighbor, or to an energy collective, or to a re-tasking company that handles the re-tasking. There is plenty of value still left.

No rebuilding required. Just straight to a new job, and on their life goes. Significantly degraded car engines can’t do that. They have to be rebuilt.

Then you buy a new battery that has gained from 10-15 year’s worth of battery advances. Your rebuilt engine doesn’t gain from 10-15 year’s worth of engine advances when you rebuild it. It’s going to be little more than the engine it was when it was first built 10-15 years before. But your Volt certainly can receive a better battery pack by then.

So I see your point about the specific benefits of rebuilding an engine that only engines enjoy. But just saying batteries can’t be rebuilt ignores the specific benefits of re-tasking and replacing batteries with improved units that I believe only batteries will enjoy.

(Quote)
omegaman66 Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:07 am

Battery Expert please don’t leave we need a balance of opinions here. Even Statik is still welcome here. hehe

It is very very difficult to make an educated decision without having heard the arguments from both sides of the issue.

(Quote)
Marty McFly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 4:10 am

I think all the used Volt batteries can be restored or recycled, for sure, they don’t have moving parts in them, I think it just a chemical process. So you should be able to trade-in your old Volt battery for an improved one and get a core-rebate. Maybe they will become simple off-the-shelf items, pretty heavy ones though.
Of course in the distant future a simple Flux Capacitor will complement those weakened batteries very nicely.

(Quote)
Don DeWalt Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 4:32 am

I have A123 batteries in my DeWalt power drill. They are tough.
Does this mean I can take my drill’s battery pack and plug it into the Volt ? Hopefully they will be interchangeable, then you can just go to your local Home Depot / Lowes and buy new batteries on demand. That is how it should be. I think my drill could power a volt at least 2 miles by itself, it is that tough.

(Quote)
Brad G Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:49 am

#82 Don DeWalt

You know, when I read about the Tesla using computer batteries I had a similar thought about power tool batteries. In the trunk area there would be racks of plugin batteries. When one goes bad you simiply replace it. Of course I’m not an engineer so I’m sure there is a reason it can’t be done, but it would solve the battery life issue. Just replace them and your Volt goes forever.

(Quote)
Grant Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:11 am

Oddly, this is one of the reasons I actually WOULD like a solar panel option, in that the energy from the panel could be used to power a cooling system for the battery while it’s parked outside on a hot day. I’ve said this since this project first started, but everyone talks about charging the battery from the panel and it’s dismisses. Solar power can do a lot more then battery charging. It could run the sound system, cool the battery, and so on, reducing the load for day travel.

(Quote)
Brad G Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:23 am

#84 Grant

Exactly my thought. From what I have read if the batteries are in a cold climate the only effect is it takes a little longer to charge them but there is no loss of battery life, but in summer heat they could get zapped pretty badly. GM talked about solar panels on the roof for interior cooling and I was thinking the interior cooling was a by-product of cooling the battery.

(Quote)
Statik Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:03 am

#26 gsned47

“To Jason M. Hendler at # 5 it sounds like you were talking about our friend Statik
—”they are very subtle, behaving as if they are helpful.”
Well at least the subtle part and being helpful although I think he wants the Volt to succeed as much as the rest of us,

Hey, I’m not subtle, lol.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:05 am

Time for a new thread? If Betsy Ross where here, I think even she would have run out of patience with this thread.

So whats next? How about something related to what our Govt will/will not be doing to encourage the production of electrics? Maybe, GWB will want to convert some of his tractors on the ranch to electric.

(Quote)
Statik Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:11 am

I’ve read this post throught a couple times, and I just want to say, “Why are we giving this guy so much/any attention?” He is blustery, combative and can barely form coherent sentences.

Case in point:
“I do not want to reveal the time, location, date, etc of when Nazri said such st***d thing, I do not want him to get fired by GM, let’s stop here, OK? I am lying OK? And the real lier will die tomorrow, OK? And I will die tomorrow, OK?”

I have never heard a professional / respectable anything talk like this. You can’t deliver honest presentation of fact like this.

(Quote)
JEC Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:27 am

I am really going off topic here, but at least it is car related…

I just spent 3 hours of my life trying to remove the spare tire (2000 Dodge Caravan) from it’s storeage location, under the rear of the van. After finally determining the cause of the problem, I proceeded to Google the issue, and found that this is a common problem and Dodge has used this same faulty design for MANY years.

Here is the issue. The tire stores under the rear pan of the van. It uses a steel cable that is cranked up/down, using a nylon bolt sized to the same size as the tire iron (at least they did not use a unique size, and required the use of another tool). A large plastic T-handle is connected to the steel cable, and will pull the tire up to store it. This end of the plastic tee pulls into a metal retaining clip. The clip is “supposed to release when you lower the tire. And this is where the insanity begins. This metal spring clip is UNDER the car, exposed to the environment. I live in Wisconsin, where they use more salt in one winter, then exists in all the oceans of the world. An yes metal rusts. So, the spring clip WILL rust and will not open.

So, if you get a flat, and it’s -20 F below, and you are trying to get the spare down, forget about it! You fingers will freeze and you will NOT be able to get the spare down. You need to have a long screwdriver, and the know-how on how to disengage this rusted clip (This is not trivial, especially if your finger are frozen and the lighting is poor). I would say this is one of the most insanely designed mechanisms I have ever encountered (and I have seen alot).

So, the moral to this story, related to the Volt, is get the design right. Run LOTS of real world scenarios. Since the Volt will be doing MANY things never done before, the opportunities for problems are huge. The basic ICE has been around since the early 1900’s, and the auto makers are still tweaking the designs. To expect the Volt to not have “oh crap” moments, and “who designed this thing, to do that…” are not probable, but the more upfront testing the better.

Like I said in previous post, TIME FOR A NEW THREAD….

(Quote)
RB Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:59 am

#89 JEC you have my sympathy. It is simply a bad design that should have been corrected long ago. I also agree with you that the Volt is going to need to do many things not yet field tested. I hope that it mostly works, and that where it fails the design is promptly corrected. If that happens customers will have patience. Putting it differently, it is why GM needs a group of sympathetic customers at first (people just like us

(Quote)
RB Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:09 am

#88 statik — I agree. Professionals do not write in the way quoted, ever.

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:12 am

Does anyone know WHERE the new Volt will be first shown?

(Quote)
GM Volt Fan Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:40 am

I want to see the government get DEAD SERIOUS about doing a LOT more basic scientific research into cutting edge battery technologies. Yes, a Manhattan Project type program that can make breakthrough discoveries in a very short period of time. A round the clock “turbo R&D” operation.

We ought to put some BIGTIME money into a battery research program. Bring in the heavy artillery brainpower. Get a large group of ph.Ds into a big network where they can collaborate via videoconferencing all they want if they are in different places. I want a very well organized, highly productive group of the best battery scientists and engineers we can get our hands on. Maybe the government could significantly scale up the PHEV research program at the Argonne Labs and coordinate everything from there or something.

http://www.transportation.anl.gov/batteries/phev_batteries.html

I bet if we got dead serious about it, our scientists and engineers could come up with a long lasting, quick charging, safe, industrial strength battery that could get us 400 miles of range by 2018 or so. Never underestimate the creativity of a bunch of scientists and engineers when a bunch of them get focused on a problem … and we DEFINITELY have some serious problems on the horizon with our current oil-based transportation system.

We have GOT to go to OIL ADDICTION REHAB … no more denial about us having a problem. The “oil dealers” have us pathetically addicted now. We tend to wait til we are in a crisis before we DO SOMETHING about our big problems. Well, we’re there … right now in July 2008.

Hopefully by July 2018, we will have kicked our oil addiction and we’ll all have a lot more peace of mind. No more being subjected to the whims of some crap going on oil producing countries or a bunch of Wall Street speculators getting richer at the expense of us drivers.

We’ll get all the energy our cars and trucks need at a reasonable price right here in America … from our own super efficient local power plants. No more making Middle East oil sheiks and people like Hugo Chavez ultra rich anymore. T. Boone Pickens was right in his commercial about us transferring a HUGE amount of our wealth to these oil countries with “problematic” regimes running them. We need to keep that money in America before the oil barons bleed us dry.

(Quote)
Jeff Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:56 am

#79

You are correct. An automotive aftermarket for E-REV cars and parts would be very helpful to promote the design. As everyone here probably knows, a massed produced automobile requires support from the aftermarket to be successful for years. I doubt that a $40K+ product is considered a “throw away” item. Of course, one could argue that the entire vehicle will be at the end of its life in 10 years. But, somebody needs to tell all of the drivers of 10+ year old vehicles.

(Quote)
NOPEC Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:56 am

I believe given the mass of the battery and the climate control the battery temperature won’t vary much under normal daily use. Insulation of at least R1 would surely help without adding much to the overall battery size. An issue with greater battery varation in temperature might occur when the vehicle is only occassionally used and is subjected to long preiods of heat or cold soaking while unsued. If plugged in it should be possible to maintain the battery temperature should GM feel it necessary.

(Quote)
Adam Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:29 am

#93 GM Volt Fan,

great idea, but the feds rather spend money on wars, and if the war wasn’t going on, than it would be focused on hydrogen.. Batteries have a lot of potential, as does EESTOR. IMO anything beats the use of petroleum, and to have EEXON/MOBIL building the Cobasys batteries for GM that are prone to failure, who’s bright idea was that?!!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:35 am

If I sat down to confer with our “Battery Expert” I might offer him comments along these lines…..

In my long experience in astrophysics & electrical engineering, I’ve found the most important step of the scientific method to be the testing phase. In 1887 Albert Michelson and Edward Morley performed one of the most important and famous tests in the history of physics. Without this test, followed by many others, Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity might never have been proven experimentally, and the rather ordinary patent office clerk who had failed high school algebra —Albert Einstein— might to this day be almost unknown.

Probably the most important thing I ever learned in the field of science was from Werner von Braun (father of the US space program). Dr.von Braun insisted that every design used in the Apollo program be subjected to extremely rigorous testing –including testing well beyond the known or predicted mechanical, thermal, radiation, etc, limits of the space environment. After Dr von Braun’s death, some NASA managers at the highest levels drifted away from the von Braun concept of rigorous testing —and we killed 14 astronauts in two shuttle disasters as a direct consequence.

I’ve talked directly with key GM engineers on the Volt program about extremely rigorous testing and as a result I’m convinced the Volt overall design, as well as the battery design itself are rock solid technology, as I commented when I called in to the radio program Tagamet arranged a couple of days ago. I’m assured GM is in fact doing extremely rigorous testing, as well as worst-case analyses, failure modes & effects analyses, etc to discover anything overlooked and prove the design beyond what’s normally needed.

As to strongly differing views between scientists ….it’s routine! I’ve given many papers at international space technology conferences. These presentations are typically followed by Q & A sessions, and some of the most heated discussions take place then. I’m only guessing, but it’s entirely possible that our “Battery Expert” asked GM’s Dr. Nazri (or vice versa) a question following a paper one of them (or someone else) gave at a Li-Ion technology conference, and that’s what he’s reporting here as a conversation with Dr. Nazri where other experts were present.

One more thing….. GM knows how to deal with extremely hot asphalt (and –40 deg winters). As one approach, think 1) of a stainless steel Thermos that keeps liquids hot or cold for hours at a time, and 2) of the latest thin-wall refrigerators that keep ice frozen for well over 24 hours during power outages. The Volt will have a full underbody sheath for aerodynamic reasons —simply adding a second T-shaped steel skin inside this sheath, welded then evacuated, creates an inexpensive thermos bottle effect. Adding perhaps ¾” of insulation similar to that in a refrigerator would complete the design. This passive approach, simplistically similar to what we do on spacecart exposed to MUCH wider thermal extremes (250 deg or more) should average the daytime & nightime ambient temperatures, leaving only very modest additional heating & cooling to be done by the battery’s active thermal control system.

And as I‘ve commented previously, an added bonus of this under-body battery insulation, as well as firewall, door panel, etc insulation would be reduced road, wind & ICE/Gen noise.

Ohhhh, and Battery Expert, as a bit of personal advise regarding working with other people, “DFTP” (Don’t Fight The Problem”).

(Quote)
Rooster Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:49 am

I just read this post and I couldn’t help but laugh, as I’m both an engineer and a MBA. Based on personal experience, when you form a BOGGSAT (Bunch Of Guys & Gals Sitting Around a Table) of world renowned technical experts to address a hard challenge, the only certainty is you won’t get a consensus — be it batteries, national energy strategy, global warming or missile defense! Especially when research dollars are on the table! As with all things in life, you have to compromise, or in engineering speak, “optimize the system.” Nothing is perfect or fool proof.

Fortunately in the case of the Volt, in the United States we have an ingenious system called the capital market that will ultimately be the “decider”. If consumers demand the Volt in the volume necessary for GM to make a positive return (defined as greater than GM’s Weighted Average Cost of Capital) – it doesn’t matter what the technical experts think. The consumer will ultimately decide the usable life of the batteries – as the decision to build the Volt has already been made. That is why GM pays Mr. Lutz and Mr. Wagoner the big bucks – they ultimately have to answer to the Board; who are elected by and represent GM’s owners (individual stock holders and mutual fund companies). If the Volt is a flop because the batteries don’t meet consumer expectations for life expectancy, they will be shown the door.

(Quote)
jeff Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:53 am

#93
I agree with your whole post. Can’t happen soon enough. An upgraded National Electric Grid can’t happen soon enough either. National pipelines for ethanol can’t happen soon enough either. New U.S. President can’t happen soon enough. New national priorities can’t happen soon enough. EIGHT years have been totally wasted along with a few trillion dollars. An American Revolution is in the air and I ain’t refering to GM cars either. Are local U.S. legislators are failing us, by bickering about non-important issues while “Rome burns”. Dwight Eisenhower, Harry Truman, Ronald Reagan we need your wisdom, they are stealing us blind. Go GM Go Volt

(Quote)
canehdian Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:59 am

“I’m envisioning degraded battery packs being re-tasked, not rebuilt.”

That’s exactly what will happen.
This pack will have MASSIVE power capacity.. 16kWh.. that’s enough to run a 13W CFL lightbulb for 1230 hours.
If “degraded” to even 1/4 of that, you could run for 307 hours.
Or a better example – Your old laptop battery might only last 30 mins for a laptop, but hook it up to a gameboy, and you can play for days.
Its certainly not useless.

(Quote)
Rooster Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:14 am

Battery Expert,

This is a sincere question and is not intended to be insolent. Are you familiar with the concept of an IPT?

Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) are formed for the sole purpose of solving issues like this by taking a systems approach. See NASAMAN’s post above for easy “system” fixes to the thermal problems. Every technical issue does not require a scientific break through to resolve. Most often it is much faster and less expensive to simply control the environment. More importantly, this is likely why GM designed a thermal management system into the battery pack.

(Quote)
Gary Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am

If the battery’s capacity it a total of 16 kWh, and the charging system only uses 8 kWh, couldn’t an on-board diagnostic sense that as the battery is getting older, it could start to use 9 kWh, 10 kWh, etc.? I’ve heard of auto-adjusting mechanical devices inside of transmissions and motorcycle engines, so why not a battery?

And the beauty is that the car’s firmware doesn’t have to have this auto-adjust feature from the factory–if it’s clear over time that the batteries lose capacity particularly under certain climate conditions, a firmware upgrade can be uploaded to the car’s computer.

(Quote)
Steve Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am

Adam #44

“I don’t know why they would want the SOC to be no higher than 80%”

*** *** ***
Grizzly #46

No one is getting the shaft. The 80% limit on the full charge is to allow some capacity for regenerative braking.

*** *** ***

From: http://www.a123systems.com/#/applications/phev/pchart3/ ,
it seems to me that the charge/discharge limits (and hence the required battery overcapacity requirements) are strongly related to power availability as a function of the SOC (State of Charge).

Is this correct?

(Quote)
Steve Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:34 am

I live in an area where the temperature can be -10 to -30 degress celsius for long periods of time … weeks.

Is a Volt recommended for me?

(Quote)
noel park Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:47 am

#19 JEC & #28 Rashiid Amul:

Good point. My S-10 (GM product BTW) just turned over 205K miles. The mileage is as good as ever.

#99 Jeff:

Amen brother, preach on!

(Quote)
nasaman Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:48 am

104 Steve….
“You asked, “I live in an area where the temperature can be -10 to -30 degress celsius for long periods of time … weeks. Is a Volt recommended for me?”

Yes, Steve, unless you ‘d have to park it outside NOT plugged in for extended periods —over 3-4 days. Also, read my comments in post #97 near the end.

(Quote)
Steve Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Thanks, Nasaman (106).

Would I be better off putting the car in a warmer garage? I think I read somewhere (I cannot remember where) that battery life might be affected by charging cycles that vary widely in ambient temperature.

(Quote)
jeremy Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:19 pm

July 12th, 2008 at 9:40 am GM Volt Fan
i agree with everything ya said man
and i agree with the others that the legislators are robbin us blind with the help of the oil companys and other moguls with there special interests in washington and every state in the union
we are fed up we are ready for a revaultion away from oil and oil companys and the goverment know it .. that is why they are trying to sway us away from an all out… fallout with them they are trying to use hydrogen and offshore drilling to apease us enough so we dont go over the satus qou line .. soo there lovely profit margins they worship dont get damged so othere investors are fed up like stuffed pigs and that ther e c e os can have the most expensivest fish eggs and gass hogginglest toys.. aka.. yahts jets and gold plated underwear.. the most fakest and youngest women possible just..because they can because we let them
while we are almost starving cant aford to save the ones e lvoe rom a cancer that would be ewasily prevented from work conditions of of profit margins or cut backs and streamlineing
all these things not only break our backs and our wills and make us basicly worker ants that work til lwe die just to feed a fat butt queen ant all her life just like honey bees and such i know if we got the cnace we wouldnt need half that crap they got or use it
woul be nice to be comfortabl againl ike we were in the 50s right?
lets return to a better time for the wworkin class
arent u all fed up with being an insect? i know i am
lets start the revaultion screw those few fat pigs over squish those queen ants lets build the volt and roll over that status qou line in style make our own rules make it OUR AMERICA
GO VOLT

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:37 pm

The neat part of posting on the internet is that Batt Exp may be a grandmother in Poland. This is a great learning opportunity to practice PDNFTT.
Thanks, Lyle.
Be well,
Tag

(Quote)
Len Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 12:55 pm

When I look at the three battery graphs I find them all fairly close to each other. I think there is no argument that the battery will degrade over time and worse at high temperature.

The guys using lithium polymere batteries to fly model airplanes say that you get better life out of the battery by not charging it up all the way ( because the voltage can rise with temperature change and it become overcharged) and never allowing it to discharge below a set voltage (which varies with chemistry) but there are also a bunch of guys that are abusing the A123 batteries and getting life beyond their dreams, but you must realize that if we get to use a battery for two years that is beyond our expectations, and then we don’t expect much punch. Right now I think the A123 is in a class by itself, but I also expect to see more new batteries and have high expectations for them.

My 92 Subaru Legacy that I purchased used with 124,000 miles on it now has 236,000 miles on it and is averaging 30 mpg over the whole tank of gas. Last tank was 29.5 mpg. I am trying to learn restraint, but still catch myself sticking my foot into the accelerator too often for childish reasons. It has plenty of acceleration still, but as it is old I have stopped running it up to 6,500 rpm.

I want a second generation Volt with the 20 mile A123 battery, but probably will settle for a used Honda Civic hybrid.

(Quote)
mikeinatl. Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:20 pm

This is not a question related to this particular thread. I am not an engineer or particularly technical, but I am very excited about the GM VOLT and hope it can be produced as planned.

I also am excited about the possibilty of one day having solar shingles on my roof that eliminate my utility bills and also charge my VOLT for another days travel.

So here is my question…

“If the onboard generator’s engine starts up when the Volt battery drops to 30% charge, wouldn’t that mean that you could only go 28 miles without using gasoline? (40 miles minus 30%).”

I apologize for the diversion…

Thanks,

Mike

(Quote)
George K Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Little off topic…
#90 RB
“I hope that it mostly works, and that where it fails the design is promptly corrected.”

Speaking of “promptly corrected”, I might be wrong, but I fear that the 50 mpg off the generator won’t hold up. I’ve been telling people, “40’s”, as not to get expectations too high, only to disappoint later.

No one has said that that is too low yet. If GM isn’t sure of the 50 mpg, perhaps Lyle could check it out and get an updated number “sooner rather than later”?

As we get closer to production, more people are going to hear about the Volt’s specs. Once saturation is reached, it’s hard to revise 50 mpg down to say, 43 mpg, without putting a hole in the Volt PR bubble.

Remember the hoopla that was triggered when Lyle announced that there would be only one smaller gas tank. We waved 640 mile range in front of everyone, then took it away and replaced it with 340 miles.

(Quote)
Herman Wiegman Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

The original posted cycle life data at two temperatures is probably good. Some Li-ion chemistries with Manganese in the cathode may have dissolution issues at higher temperatuers.

I trust GM is on top of these issues and I know they are concerned about product quality, so we will probably see some time spent on cooling systems, chemistry selection, and warrentee support.

HLNW

(Quote)
jeff Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

OT: I think houses(homes) need battery back-up to help stabilize the power grid. It seems there is a massive need for quality batteries. Home generators just don’t cut it — to noisey, to dirty, to ineffecient. I haven’t seen that market being addressed. I suppose the utilities are opposed to that too. So with all the automotive and power grid needs, mass production of batteries is almost the easy way out of our National Power Grid problems and several other National problems too. The muddy water is getting clearer and clearer. Or am I over simplifing this.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:28 pm

#103 Steve –

Power availability is related to state of charge, however with modern lithium batteries, especially A123 (and presumably their competitors like LG) the power/voltage curve over time as SOC decreases is relatively flat. Certainly compared to NiMH it is. I doubt the difference would be noticeable when you were driving the car. It’s the kind of thing you can see on a graph, but the real-world effects might be harder to gauge.

(Quote)
canehdian Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:35 pm

“As we get closer to production, more people are going to hear about the Volt’s specs. Once saturation is reached, it’s hard to revise 50 mpg down to say, 43 mpg, without putting a hole in the Volt PR bubble.”

I have a feeling it’s going to be higher than 50 – electric is vastly more efficient than gas.
Yes, a gas ICE is charging the battery, but there’s no losses to drivetrain/rolling resistance/wind/etc as would be present in a normal car, and on top of that, the engine can work at its peak performance (the load is constant on the generator, its not varying except during start-up)

I could be entirely wrong, however

(Quote)
Ask Expert Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:52 pm

Why not give Dr. Menahem Anderman an interview on this subject? He is by far the most authoritative expert on this subject. I think most people here have no clue about battery based on their replies, and comments from GM are simply sugar coated. Of course most people hope PHEV/EV will be successful, but until major breakthrough in battery comes, hybrid vehicle using Li-ion battery is the most probable outcome, and GM is hyping way too much and may push them into liquidation should they fail. If they fail because they hype GM Volt dishonestly, tax payer should NOT pay to keep them alive.

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 1:58 pm

#117 Ask — Dr Anderman is welcome to post anything he wishes to post. We’ll be interested in his comments (but probably be a little skeptical, as we are toward everyone, and not take them as the gospel truth). Even in our clueless ignorance, we all realize that there is uncertainty in new technology and new products based on new technology.

(Quote)
TL Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pm

If Li-Ion Battery isn’t able to re-capture the regen-breaking fast enough then maybe GM can add a bank of fast charge capacitors for the regen-breaking energy recapturing, then use the energy in the capacitors to power the car off the stop which supposedly use the most energy.

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:04 pm

#111 mike asks if the fact that the ICE comes on at 30% SOC means that one gets only 28 miles before that happens. Mike, as GM has presented the specis, the Volt goes at least 40 mile before the ICE comes on, not a reduced value. That is, if hypothetically the ICE never came on, the car would go some more miles beyond 40 before the battery level was used up.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Cyclop,
“#117 Ask — Dr Anderman is welcome to post anything he wishes to post”

And we’d know it was the good Dr, er, how?
Be well,
Tag

(Quote)
noel park Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:50 pm

#116 canehdian:

That’s my understanding. I sure hope so.

#121 Tagamet:

Richard Petty commented a while ago. Do you mean to say that it might not have really been him?

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 2:53 pm

Noel,
“#121 Tagamet:
Richard Petty commented a while ago. Do you mean to say that it might not have really been him?”

Yeah, he was right after Battery Expert (G)
Be well,
Tag

(Quote)
CS GUY Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:03 pm

Don’t be too upset at Battery Expert. His sophomoric attempt to prevent the inevitable has already failed. Those of us who know that electric vehicles are the only hope for our future will spread the message and eventually the internal combustion engine will die. It will be remembered by historians, relegated to the realm of the back yard tinkerers just like the steam engine is now. Children will snicker and hold their noses at a science fair demonstration of how things used to be.

A quaint curiosity.

If your Volt battery pack needs to be replaced in 10 years it will cost a percentage of the value of the vehicle, yes, but not like replacing an ICE engine at 100,000 miles today. The difference is that battery technology advances will make the replacement pack lighter, more powerful and cheaper. Unlike the internal combustion engine which just keeps getting more complex and more expensive year after year.

Good luck keeping us away from electric vehicles. If Lithium Ion battery technology fails to achieve the needed advances then ultra-capacitors or flywheel storage will. Or something we haven’t even heard of yet. The end of combustion technology is near. We should all be asking what took us so long.

(Quote)
George K Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:06 pm

#116 canehdian
“I have a feeling it’s going to be higher than 50″

I hope you’re right. GM must know by now, as they have been testing the mules and cycling the live batteries for a while…. Wouldn’t you love to be one of those testers?

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

Rooster # 101

“Every technical issue does not require a scientific break through to resolve. Most often it is much faster and less expensive to simply control the environment. More importantly, this is likely why GM designed a thermal management system into the battery pack.”

*** *** ***

Rooster I agree. I’ve said it before, it’s not as though GM is promising some sort of flux Eestor capacitor. This is Li-ion which has been used extensively in Laptops, Gaming consoles, Cell phones, and WILL be used in other BEVs like the Tesla, and Phoenix to name a couple. In the case of the Phoenix, the Pickup will use a
35 Kw/h Lithium titanate pack that to my knowledge won’t need a TMS.

http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com/vehicles/index.php

So if this is such “pie in the sky” technology that won’t last, it sure seems there are quite a few companies destined to bite the dust along with GM. I don’t think it’ll happen.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:32 pm

Tag #121

“And we’d know it was the good Dr, er, how?”

*** *** ***

As memory serves, it would be as soon as we see the pitch for Toyota.

(Quote)
fred Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 3:34 pm

I am going to cut out the floor panels so I (and my passengers) can flintstone the VOLT when I forget to plug it in and also forgot that I haven’t put gas in it for years. I’ll be carrying extra batteries for my optional flashlight headlamps also. Luckily my squeeze bulb horn uses no juice. Patiently awaiting my very own VOLT.

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 4:56 pm

#128 fred — Don’t forget your transistor radio.

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 5:14 pm

#80 omegaman66 says: “Battery Expert please don’t leave we need a balance of opinions here. Even Statik is still welcome here. hehe”
————————————————————————————–
I’ll second that.

Battery Expert – the best way to deal with irrational flames against you is to simply ignore them. For my part, I’d still like to hear more about your data. Specifically, I’d like to know if liquid cooling and average temperature swings would change your test cycle.

It would be nice to actually discuss the possible pros and cons of the Volt’s battery in a real world environment, rather that who said what when and where.

(Quote)
Ryan P Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 5:23 pm

Tag, What is PDNFTT ?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 5:25 pm

From the article: “It looks like our “Battery Expert” really is fabricating things other than batteries.”
————————————————————————————–
Lyle,
As a member of the press, you have heard 2 different accounts of a private conversation. To automaticaly make a judement as to which one is true and come down hard on the other is not very impartial.

Battery Expert seems to be the only independant source of real world data on car batteries. I for one would like to hear more of what he has to say, whether or not I agree with it.

The “either you’re with us or you’re against us” strategy didn’t play well with George W 5 years ago, and it doesn’t play well here.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 5:51 pm

I want to echo Statik in my disapproval of Battery Expert’s “delivery method” for his alleged information. I would take him more seriously if he would adopt a more mature tone.

Battery Expert’s posting style is a disgrace to the level-headed scientific thought he claims to represent.

This community is open-minded and reasonable. We need not be rude to Battery Expert, but I know I expect a little more from someone who is supposedly an expert in their field.

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 5:53 pm

PDNFTT = PDFTT = Please don’t feed the trolls.

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:02 pm

I recall seeing some A123 data (several months ago) that showed if the cells were always kept in the 30% – 80% SOC window range, 7000+ cycles with 80+% capacity was still achievable even at 60 C.

Does this ring a bell with anyone ? Please comment.

I don’t think I imagined this information.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:18 pm

Dave G
Politics aside, Lyle is a physician, not a journalist. He provides US more info from inside GM than any other source. Sounds like you don’t appreciated it, but I’ll wager a buck and a quarter that you’re in a tiny minority.
Tag

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:27 pm

E.E.T. # 135

If your data is correct that’s almost 20 years performance at about 140F, or 10 years if you charge twice a day.

Now I’ve got to wonder what Lutz meant when he said “we felt there was a little less risk with one company” when referring to the Volt’s battery.

Can anyone confirm those figures? I’m doing a search on this now.

(Quote)
Exp_EngTech Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 6:55 pm

Again, I don’t think I imagined the information.
So I’m asking for some backup / confirmation.

Keeping the cells in the 30% – 80% SOC window is key.
Hopefully there is a A123 Systems employee lurking on this site who can provide some insite.

FYI, my handle “Exp_EngTech” is short for Experienced Engineering Tech. I have 30+ years in the Electronics Industry. I’ve worked with Avionics, Anesthesia Monitoring Systems and now, HVAC / DDC (Direct Digital Control) Network Systems.

I follow the Volt and the development of certain BEV’s (Subaru’s R1e / Mitsubishi’s iMiEV) very closely. All game changers as I see it.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:13 pm

Hmmm haven’t found anything yet. Just one from a gaming site that shows A123’s cells rated for 1000 cycles but that could be deep cycle:

http://www.flyelectric.ukgateway.net/lithium-a123.htm

Found this interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ayuFBDrSg

(Quote)
cyclop Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 7:24 pm

Thread summary: When I read back through all the comments on this thread, what I see is fairly good agreement that

1) there will be a gradual decline in Volt battery capability over a period of years.
2) the rate of decline will be somewhat affected by environmental factors such as temperature, so the car is marginally better suited to some places than others.

Seems to be pretty much as expected. Nothing much new.

(Quote)
ThombDbhomb Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:22 pm

#138 Exp_EngTech

Here is some forum discussion:
http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?t=283

(Quote)
fred Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 8:30 pm

#129
Don’t want a radio
Silence is golden(PRICELESS)
Do you NEED a radio?]
Luv Ya!

(Quote)
250volts Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 9:58 pm

#16 Battery Expert – Just curious but when you use a title like Battery Expert it brings to question just what are your credentials. Care to share with the site what makes you an expert? And I’m not doubting you, just curious as to what makes you “the expert”. We can certainly benefit from battery expertise out there and it would be great to bounce thoughts and ideas off an expert.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 10:13 pm

#137 Grizzly says:

“Now I’ve got to wonder what Lutz meant when he said “we felt there was a little less risk with one company” when referring to the Volt’s battery.”

I wonder about this too. It was originally interpreted by folks around here as financial/business risk, like one battery company was more able to provide the product on time, reliably, etc. This makes sense to me, but when I hear the word “risk” in terms of new Li-Ion electric car batteries, I think of the physical risk of using the battery itself. Which battery will be more robust, safer, longer-lasting?

(Quote)
mikeinatl. Says:
July 12th, 2008 at 11:34 pm

thanks to 120 Cyclop for answering my naive question re: 40 miles until the ICE engages.

So when you run out of gas, I guess you would still have that 30% battery capacity left or about a 12 mile “reserve tank”.

Would be cool if GM designed some warning for when the gas runs out. 12 miles should be enough to find gas or plug in. No need to “flintstone” the car anywhere. (but a funny line anyway.)

And now another dumb question off the topic.
How long can gasoline sit in a tank and still be viable as fuel? For a fair amount of people, they would never get into using the gasoline because most folks don’t travel 40 miles or more. In an outboard motor old fuel spells trouble.

Mike

(Quote)
Darius Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 3:01 am

Does regenerative braking current will be not used by capacitors and vice versa with acceleration?

(Quote)
Dave G Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 8:06 am

#136 Tagamet says: “He provides US more info from inside GM than any other source. Sounds like you don’t appreciated it, …”
————————————————————————————-
Of course I appreciate Lyle’s info. That’s why I’ve been posting here the last 14 months. But I also appreciate other sources of information, whether I agree with them or not. It’s always useful to have opposing points of view. To be clear, the only thing in Lyle’s article that upsets me is the last sentence. All the rest is great.

(Quote)
Mark Bartosik Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 10:15 am

For the graphs to be convincing I would want to see:

Test data (more graphs) that demonstrated the characteristics did not change with cell size. That may be the theory, but proof is in testing (that’s what testing is for).

Same SOC range used, 30% to 80%. I suspect that the tests were done to full discharge, which is very different. Enerdel claim their chemistry is more tolerant to wide SOC window, but we are not dealing with Enerdel cells. The graphs do state the way discharge was done 5A constant current to 2.2V, but is that to 30% SOC?

Even then I would be suspicious because the A123 chemistry is known to be custom tweaked for the Volt and not available to anyone else other than GM. Not sure about LG.

Even then I would be suspicious because the battery pack will help control temperatures, and importantly temperature swings.

This is of course why GM is doing lots and lots of testing, as they should. Because they need this data.

Some how I think that this was not done to generate the graph shown.

(Quote)
Jake Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 7:52 pm

Mark Bartosik – If the graph represents the cell I’m thinking of, the tests do not represent the 30% to 80% SOC window. This A123 cell is 3.3V nominal, 3.6V charged. 2.2V is most likely at or below the precipitous voltage drop at the end of a discharge cycle. So I think you’re right, this test was done on a 0% – 100% SOC basis.

This brings up another question for me. Are both A123’s and LG’s battery packs designed to operate in the 30% to 80% window? I would imagine the companies have slightly different ways of reaching 40 miles AER and 10 year life.

(Quote)
Grizzly Says:
July 13th, 2008 at 11:06 pm

Dave G

“But I also appreciate other sources of information, whether I agree with them or not.”

*** *** ***
Dave G,

So do I, but there comes a time to evaluate things and not accept face value. Does anyone remember this troll from many moons ago? He trolled this site to a frenzy. He dissed GM because he wasn’t offered a job in battery development and posted negatively on this site from a JAL (Japan Air Lines) flight? Remember? He’s appeared sporadically since then. He’s now taken the softer and gentler approach in the hope of credibility and even states ridiculously he “hopes GM is successful”, despite pitching Toyota’s hybrids, just like JAL! The signatures are unmistakable! If anyone is buying this BS I’ve got plenty of swamp property for sale if you’re interested.

Lyle created this topic so in this tread it’s OK, but my advice is that moving forward …..P.D.F.T.T!

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 14th, 2008 at 8:03 am

Grizzly@150

Yep.

Be well,
Tag

(Quote)
Eco Says:
July 14th, 2008 at 8:54 am

I have to agree that our Battery Expert should be welcome to stay, if he or she learns to play nicely.

You don’t get smarter about the world by reading what you know, and looking for information you agree with, and dismissing what you do not agree with.

(Quote)
Tagamet Says:
July 14th, 2008 at 9:42 am

Moving on…..

(Quote)
Battery Expert #2 Says:
July 15th, 2008 at 12:49 pm

I have no battery knowledge, except that I use them in my flashlight (and I am a smart a**).
I look forward to seeing what GM does with the Volt concept, but I am concerned about the 30C (86F) battery degredation mentioned in the article. Here in South Texas the summer temps are more like 35.5C (96F) on average. It seems that this would be a problem for a production vehicle. Batteries are likely to be expensive.

(Quote)
another battery guy Says:
July 18th, 2008 at 1:31 pm

A car is parked 90% of its life.
I’m confident that GM will have a cooling system (as does the new daimler hybrid which uses te AC to cool down its JC-SAFt batteries).

But what happens when during summer you park your car and the temperature goes up (? Will the AC have to run all day in the parking lot? I don’t think so…

(Quote)

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts

New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009
November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]
srschrier
New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009
From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]
srschrier
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory November 18, 2009
Th!nk picks Indiana for U.S. factory: _Link_ (http://www.allcarselectric.com/blog/1038564_thnk-picks-indiana-for-u-s-factory) […]
Jason M. Hendler
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010 November 18, 2009
FIRST ALL-ELECTRIC APTERA 2e PUSHED BACK TO 2010: _Link_... […]
Jason M. Hendler
Any news about the NiMH battery? November 18, 2009
Now that there are new owners of the patent, is there any indication that they will allow its use for electric cars? Like many others, I believe that... […]
Desertstraw
energy requirments of modern electric vehicles November 18, 2009
does anyone know any credible sources of information concerning the electricity requirements of modern electric vehicles per mile of travel and the... […]
crubkings
30% reduction November 18, 2009
The Belgian governement decided that if you buy a car with less then 60g/km emmision you get a 15% tax reduction and you can write it off for 100% if... […]
filiep

How Will the Volt’s Battery Perform at Different Temperatures?

155 Responses to “How Will the Volt’s Battery Perform at Different Temperatures?”

Leave a Reply

Recent Posts

Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts