Any tests done on Vampire battery drain?

[DJG]

I am surprised Rivian does not have a lighter version of this in the shop already. An accessory you could include in bed or inside R1S for those solo iffy adventure trips. At 2.7 KW peak output it could beat R1 power leak.

Tesla doesn't even have it, and they are also a solar panel company. Time spent on R&D for something like this takes away from R&D on the R2, or whatever else that would apply to all owners, as it's a zero sum game on resources.

How long would it have to be deployed just to make up for the lost range from towing it? 2.7kw peak will end up being about 1-1.5kw in the battery after losses and thermal management (what I've witnessed charging at that rate on a home charger). You'll only get that for perhaps a few hours a day, if it's not cloudy, so on a good day perhaps you eek out 10kwh of energy, or 7.5% of the battery (probably generous). If you needed something like this, that means you've towed it a long ways, hundreds of miles, and eaten up multiples of that while doing so. Pulling this behind you also limits the distance from your last charger you can go, by probably 100 mi or more.

Not to mention the fact it would probably cost about $15,000 and it would make more sense to just get the Max pack. Rivian determined that a solar panel on the roof didn't provide the efficiency/energy to make up for the weight to add any appreciable net energy, so the answer certainly isn't to just add more panels and put them on a trailer with aero drag. Solar tech needs to make more advancements in efficiency for this to be viable, which is why Tesla isn't making it, but rather showing it as a concept for when it is somewhere down the road. However, by the time it is, it's not needed because the charging infrastructure will be sufficient for 99.99% of trips.

Sponsored

 

[Max]

Tesla doesn't even have it, and they are also a solar panel company. Time spent on R&D for something like this takes away from R&D on the R2, or whatever else that would apply to all owners, as it's a zero sum game on resources.

How long would it have to be deployed just to make up for the lost range from towing it? 2.7kw peak will end up being about 1-1.5kw in the battery after losses and thermal management (what I've witnessed charging at that rate on a home charger). You'll only get that for perhaps a few hours a day, if it's not cloudy, so on a good day perhaps you eek out 10kwh of energy, or 7.5% of the battery (probably generous). If you needed something like this, that means you've towed it a long ways, hundreds of miles, and eaten up multiples of that while doing so. Pulling this behind you also limits the distance from your last charger you can go, by probably 100 mi or more.

Not to mention the fact it would probably cost about $15,000 and it would make more sense to just get the Max pack. Rivian determined that a solar panel on the roof didn't provide the efficiency/energy to make up for the weight to add any appreciable net energy, so the answer certainly isn't to just add more panels and put them on a trailer with aero drag. Solar tech needs to make more advancements in efficiency for this to be viable, which is why Tesla isn't making it, but rather showing it as a concept for when it is somewhere down the road. However, by the time it is, it's not needed because the charging infrastructure will be sufficient for 99.99% of trips.

you have some points there but if you read my post again, your points in loss of energy in taking it with you does not apply:

" An accessory you could include in bed or inside R1S "

All testing so far shows taking it along this way does not show any appreciable hit on range.

of course I personally wouldn't pay $15K for this because I don't take that kinda adventures very often. I would much rather if Rivian stopped the leak. However if it was available at a reasonable price, I diffidently consider it since my vehicle is sitting in the driveway more often than it moves.

 

[zefram47]

Just another data point from a non-Rivian. My MINI sat for 10 days unplugged and lost less than 1% SoC in that time When I got in to drive this morning it still showed 100% SoC.

 

[Max]

Just another data point from a non-Rivian. My MINI sat for 10 days unplugged and lost less than 1% SoC in that time When I got in to drive this morning it still showed 100% SoC.

Wow. That means R1T in it's best day (1%) looses 40 times power of a mini.

 

[DJG]

you have some points there but if you read my post again, your points in loss of energy in taking it with you does not apply:

" An accessory you could include in bed or inside R1S "

All testing so far shows taking it along this way does not show any appreciable hit on range.

of course I personally wouldn't pay $15K for this because I don't take that kinda adventures very often. I would much rather if Rivian stopped the leak. However if it was available at a reasonable price, I diffidently consider it since my vehicle is sitting in the driveway more often than it moves.

Sorry, missed that part. In that case, it's an entirely different product, because something that fits inside the vehicle or even the bed, would only provide enough energy to power auxiliary devices and not the vehicle in any appreciable amount.

I think what you're looking for is something like this:

https://www.bluettipower.com/produc...DsoVKnJH34Qt45w-qEhCq4EEM4UmLyMxoCo3IQAvD_BwE

It even has a NEMA TT-30 120v/30a outlet (3.6kw), but the inverter is limited to 2,200 watts continuous. Of note, each one of those 200w solar panels measures 2' x 7.5' when opened.

 

[zefram47]

Sorry, missed that part. In that case, it's an entirely different product, because something that fits inside the vehicle or even the bed, would only provide enough energy to power auxiliary devices and not the vehicle in any appreciable amount.

I think what you're looking for is something like this:

https://www.bluettipower.com/produc...DsoVKnJH34Qt45w-qEhCq4EEM4UmLyMxoCo3IQAvD_BwE

It even has a NEMA TT-30 120v/30a outlet (3.6kw), but the inverter is limited to 2,200 watts continuous. Of note, each one of those 200w solar panels measures 2' x 7.5' when opened.

So for over $3k you could add maybe 3 miles of range to an R1. And that puny solar panel isn't worth anything. In full sun, you *might* generate 1.2 kWh/day (~2 mi)...likely much less.

 

[DJG]

So for over $3k you could add maybe 3 miles of range to an R1. And that puny solar panel isn't worth anything. In full sun, you *might* generate 1.2 kWh/day (~2 mi)...likely much less.

It says the panels can generate 900w at peak, though not sure how that math works with 3 x 200w panels.

But yeah, goes back to my earlier point, solar isn't going to do you a ton of good, only enough to offset vampire drain somewhat. This system is at least useful in a lot of other ways, but more so for an ICE camper/overlander and for home backup.

 

[staples]

With gear guard off on 2022.19.3. About 7% lost over 102 hours. Hoping this has been improved in 2022.23.3.

 

[DJG]

Wow. That means R1T in it's best day (1%) looses 40 times power of a mini.

We don't know how much it is losing vs. using. There's an important difference between the two. My eTron has been sitting since my Rivian delivery on 6/3 and lost 1% total in that time. Is that good, or is that actually bad? I don't know the answer but it raises questions. Maybe it should be using more... It actually makes we wonder if it's good to just sit there (outside in TX heat) and not take any measures to regulate battery temp. Audi is also not gathering data from it, so it's not using that energy either.

There's not a hole in the battery dripping electrons on the pavement, so we can't actually say what's bad or what's waste vs. not. We should be able to know that info, but that's another topic.

 

[Max]

We don't know how much it is losing vs. using. There's an important difference between the two. My eTron has been sitting since my Rivian delivery on 6/3 and lost 1% total in that time. Is that good, or is that actually bad? I don't know the answer but it raises questions. Maybe it should be using more... It actually makes we wonder if it's good to just sit there (outside in TX heat) and not take any measures to regulate battery temp. Audi is also not gathering data from it, so it's not using that energy either.

There's not a hole in the battery dripping electrons on the pavement, so we can't actually say what's bad or what's waste vs. not. We should be able to know that info, but that's another topic.

My understanding is that Rivian is a noisy little beast and if it is using the juice to cool the battery, it should be detectable. Some reports of power loss has been at perfect temperatures so I hold judgment on that.

I agree with you that we shouldn't have to guess. If Bolt at third of the price can tell it's owner how it is using the energy, R1 should be able to do that too. Rivian minimalist mode of communication on it's interface is not my thing. I like to see battery and motor temps. If Rivian chooses not to tell me how my energy is being used (assuming it is intentional use not a waste due to bad design), as a cynic, it is my duty to assume the worse. If they don't have anything to hide, they can simply tell me what they are doing with it. Until then a leak or a use I wouldn't approve of is my default assumption. The reason I feel justified to go with the leak assumption is their recent update that improved the leak. If they were using that energy for something vital, they would not be making that compromise. If it was for something nice but unimportant , they would tell us what it was. A booboo that was fixed is my best guess. That is what I call a leak (electrons traveling with a passport which do not have my stamp of approval) If there was a booboo there, there could be a fixable booboo somewhere else too.

I perfectly respect your choice as an optimist to assume it is all for the good of the battery and to believe other manufactures just don't care about their batteries (original leaf didn't so you are justified). I will keep poking until they tell me what they are doing with my energy and give me the option to opt out at my own risk or fix it if it is unintentional. Someone has to be annoying, it may as well be me.

I think what you're looking for is something like this:

https://www.bluettipower.com/produc...DsoVKnJH34Qt45w-qEhCq4EEM4UmLyMxoCo3IQAvD_BwE

It even has a NEMA TT-30 120v/30a outlet (3.6kw), but the inverter is limited to 2,200 watts continuous. Of note, each one of those 200w solar panels measures 2' x 7.5' when opened.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. Those shapes for solar panels but shorter could fit in gear tunnel. If they are thin enough, you may be able to get enough surface area to get some practical use. R1 has AC inverters and battery so I would just want the panel and associated circuits to get the juice to R1 battery. DC or AC power transfer does not matter to me, whatever that makes the whole setup cheaper.

Tesla panel design above gives 4.5 times surface area when open. Depending on how thick and heavy that is, if you can stack two of them inside R1T bed, at 15W per square foot (240W per 4x4 panel), it will give you 2,160W. Almost 5 miles an hour. 5 hours of good sun may get you unstuck and to a charger.

As it may be obvious by now, I don't know what I am taking about; never built a solar power solution. Just an exercise in math. In practice, I believe you are correct that it will be too expensive if manufacturer has it as an option but I love to see a home made overlander solution.

 

[ajdelange]

About 7% lost over 102 hours.

That's about 1.6%/da which is pretty good.

Hoping this has been improved in 2022.23.3.

Which functions are you willing to give up to get lower?

 

[ajdelange]

We don't know how much it is losing vs. using.

Most things in a BEV are pretty efficient by which I mean 90% and up so very little of it is lost. Most of it is used to do something other than move the car such as maintain the battery and/or cabin temperature (in which case if cooling is involved it is more than 100% efficient), monitor for your phone's bluetooth and key cards, report to the app, turn on lights when you approach etc. The thing is that some readers find those actions useless and in that sense the energy expended on them is indeed lost.

 

[ajdelange]

As it may be obvious by now, I don't know what I am taking about; never built a solar power solution. Just an exercise in math. In practice, I believe you are correct that it will be too expensive if manufacturer has it as an option but I love to see a home made overlander solution.

You can get about 1/4 kW from a panel under full sun. In mid latitude you can expect from 3 - 6 hours of full sun equivalent per day in, respectively, December and June, meaning, from 4 panels, 3 to 6 kWh per day. Assuming 2% vampire drain per day reuires much of that, 2.4 kWh, to cover which doesn't leave much to add to your return range: 3.6 kWh/d in Jun. That's equivalent to 7.2 miles/d at 500 Wh/mi which is optimistic since you presumably have not driven to your campsite on bitumen.

 

[Budman]

With gear guard off on 2022.19.3. About 7% lost over 102 hours. Hoping this has been improved in 2022.23.3.

Looks like the battery loss is not a slow continuous loss but rather comes in big sudden losses about 16 hours apart. Not obvious related to temperature but we would really need to look at battery temperature not ambient temperature to know if it is going to battery cooling.

 

[Attesan997]

Most things in a BEV are pretty efficient by which I mean 90% and up so very little of it is lost. Most of it is used to do something other than move the car such as maintain the battery and/or cabin temperature (in which case if cooling is involved it is more than 100% efficient), monitor for your phone's bluetooth and key cards, report to the app, turn on lights when you approach etc. The thing is that some readers find those actions useless and in that sense the energy expended on them is indeed lost.

While I'll agree with what you say in terms of efficiency it doesn't mean more improvement isn't possible. You're assuming the software is fully optimized for lack of a better word. Copied from the latest update notes:

Improve the sleep performance and consistency to reduce range loss while vehicle is in an idle state.

This has made it into every update, as far as I recall. The continued work doesn't appear to be at the cost of another feature as your argument poses as I don't see a "features removed" section. Maybe the improvement they're targeting is so minor it won't have an impact in real world useage. Maybe things are as optimized as they can get and the only next step is to disable functionality. In any case I'd expect this wording to change or disappear if they reach the point where idle drain is at their internal target.

Sponsored