400v / 800v architecture?

[Drogon]

All,

I see that rivian has some patent that would potentially allow for a DCFC charging speed that matches a vehicle with an 800v architecture. I have not seen any confirmation of this though.

Does anyone have any information on this? Is the car equipped e hardware that could allow 800v DCFC charging speeds but will the vehicles will originally be limited to 400v speeds?

I have an R1S that had a first half 23 delivery window.

Thanks!

Sponsored

 

[electruck]

All,

I see that rivian has some patent that would potentially allow for a DCFC charging speed that matches a vehicle with an 800v architecture. I have not seen any confirmation of this though.

Does anyone have any information on this? Is the car equipped e hardware that could allow 800v DCFC charging speeds but will the vehicles will originally be limited to 400v speeds?

I have an R1S that had a first half 23 delivery window.

Thanks!

Rivian has given no indication to date that the R1 platform might ever support in excess of ~200 kW charging or that the hardware to implement the patent is in place waiting to be enabled by a future OTA update.

 

[SeaGeo]

Rivian has given no indication to date that the R1 platform might ever support in excess of ~200 kW charging or that the hardware to implement the patent is in place waiting to be enabled by a future OTA update.

Agreed. MotorTrend says they have, but I'm fairly confident that was a miscommunication between RIvian and MotorTrend that neither has fixed.

 

[electruck]

Agreed. MotorTrend says they have, but I'm fairly confident that was a miscommunication between RIvian and MotorTrend that neither has fixed.

I too suspect some misunderstanding on the part of MT. So far, Rivian has only publicly indicated that the RAN chargers will be upgraded from 200+ to 300+ kW in the future.

 

[Drogon]

So there is no battery patent that they filed that could allow the battery to mimick 800v architecture for charging purposes?

 

[SeaGeo]

So there is no battery patent that they filed that could allow the battery to mimick 800v architecture for charging purposes?

they filed it, they just haven't confirmed that they're *using* it on the initial vehicles.

My guess is they'll implement it on the max packs.

 

[Drogon]

I'm new on this forum but do find it a bit disconcerting that they don't release tech specs like this, esp w R1T deliveries underway. I guess they are going to leave it to the forums to educate people!

 

[SeaGeo]

I'm new on this forum but do find it a bit disconcerting that they don't release tech specs like this, esp w R1T deliveries underway. I guess they are going to leave it to the forums to educate people!

This is a pet peeve of mine as well. Their website is also misleading, as when you go to "charging" from the R1T or R1S it talked about the capabilities of RAN intermixed with the actual trucks. And they note that RAN will be able to output 300kW. But that doesn't mean the R1T or R1S will be able to accept 300kW with current hardware.


If you go under platform they do say this:
"Our battery packs are engineered and tested for extreme hot and cold temperatures. Optimized thermal control allows towing of up to 11,000 lbs on steep grades, high-power DC fast charging at over 200 kW for sustained periods to ensure the shortest possible charging times and controlled cell temperatures to enhance battery performance and extend driving range."

That doesn't lock it to a 400v system, but it does suggest that's all it is given the pack. They also say 140 miles in 20 minutes, which would back out to ~190 kw.

I get the sense that they're trying to avoid technical specs an an apple-like manner. Tesla does the same thing and completely avoids voltage descriptions. The whole thing is annoying to me personally, and I appreciate the clarity that some of the "legacy" automakers have taken in this regard.

 

[Drogon]

This is a pet peeve of mine as well. Their website is also misleading, as when you go to "charging" from the R1T or R1S it talked about the capabilities of RAN intermixed with the actual trucks. And they note that RAN will be able to output 300kW. But that doesn't mean the R1T or R1S will be able to accept 300kW with current hardware.


If you go under platform they do say this:
"Our battery packs are engineered and tested for extreme hot and cold temperatures. Optimized thermal control allows towing of up to 11,000 lbs on steep grades, high-power DC fast charging at over 200 kW for sustained periods to ensure the shortest possible charging times and controlled cell temperatures to enhance battery performance and extend driving range."

That doesn't lock it to a 400v system, but it does suggest that's all it is given the pack. They also say 140 miles in 20 minutes, which would back out to ~190 kw.

I get the sense that they're trying to avoid technical specs an an apple-like manner. Tesla does the same thing and completely avoids voltage descriptions. The whole thing is annoying to me personally, and I appreciate the clarity that some of the "legacy" automakers have taken in this regard.

I guess we should start a thread then to track people's charging curve experiences, so we can all understand. Thanks I advance to all of you early customers who would be willing to share!

Another question - have they released usable versus actual size (in kwh) of the battery pack for the large pack (not max). I've seen 133 kwh but not sure exactly what that represents. I'm wondering if they are taking a mach e approach and holding back battery capacity or if they are allowing more usage upfront

 

[SeaGeo]

I guess we should start a thread then to track people's charging curve experiences, so we can all understand. Thanks I advance to all of you early customers who would be willing to share!

Another question - have they released usable versus actual size (in kwh) of the battery pack for the large pack (not max). I've seen 133 kwh but not sure exactly what that represents. I'm wondering if they are taking a mach e approach and holding back battery capacity or if they are allowing more usage upfront

133 is the usable. I need to go back and double check total. I can't remember if it was 135 or 144.

 

[KeithPleas]

FWIW, here's an article from 3 years ago where RJ discusses exactly this.

 

[KenJ]

Maybe I’m way rusty from undergrad engineering classes, but ultimately, isn’t the limitation on charge speed the power-delivery (kW or kVA, basically V*A) and ability of the cell to manage the heat generated in the process? I get that the battery pack voltage itself makes SOME improvement in vehicle-side losses (motor efficiency, controllers), reduces cable sizes in the vehicle (less I^2*R losses in conductors, but losses from internal cell resistance is still the same) and definitely on the charging side (like DCFC cordsets that would have to be larger to deliver more amperage). But a lot of the conversation seems to be the perception that 800v charging is going to radically shorten charging time (and that not getting it renders the cars outdated etc). I’d imagine connecting the pack cells in series to achieve higher voltage (versus parallel) doesn’t change how fast the cell can absorb the heat generated in the charge cycle.

Sponsored