Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

41 - 60 of 67 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
I agree with both, although my model says 10% to 55% takes 32.5 minutes. My final example basically was 110 mile legs (done with 55-mile-spaced chargers).
That might be a very accurate number. I don't have enough runs with 150 A chargers to confirm. A safer number might even be 35 min (including activation and deactivation time).

Question for you, @NewsCoulomb, when you plan a trip, how much do you aim to arrive at the charging station with, and how much does it very either side of the planned amount? I observe that there is noticeable time saved from minimizing the reserve, but also increased risk — for example, the difference between 7.5% and 15% is 30 minutes.

In more detail, for the 1000 km trip, stopping every 200 km, here are the total charging times for different reserve levels:

  • 2.5%, 180 mins
  • 5.0%, 185 mins
  • 7.5%, 195 mins
  • 10.0%, 205 mins
  • 12.5%, 215 mins
  • 15.0%, 225 mins
  • 17.5%, 235 mins
  • 20.0%, 245 mins
  • 22.5%, 259 mins
  • 25.0%, 277 mins
  • 27.5%, 295 mins
  • 30.0%, 316 mins
  • 32.5%, 334 mins
  • 35.0%, 376 mins
I actually don't plan for a specific reserve. As a rule, I try to be between 10% and 20% when I stop, but I'm still adjusting to the refreshed Range Estimator. Originally, I would base the leg on the Min estimate, and I would typically arrive in the 10% to 20% range. Now, I can practically do that basing the leg on the middle estimate (it's very conservative).

In practice, I've moved away from relying on the Range Estimator at all during the charging session, and I largely ignore it during driving. I now primarily rely on the battery percentage, and based on anticipated driving speed, elevation changes, weather, and what I know of the Bolt EV's efficiency in those conditions, I charge to a set battery percentage rather than an estimated range. I then adjust my speed as needed while driving.

The amount of reserve I'm aiming for really depends on what I'm trying to accomplish on the trip and the infrastructure available along the route). Along my regular Highway 99 route (with all its redundancies), I drive less cautiously than I do along, say, I-15 or I-40 where infrastructure is limited.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #42
Interesting that this topic came up, when I was building the Bolt model, I noted that Bo's road trip comparison is really unfavorable to the Bolt. One of my little side projects (That hasn't gotten enough of my time) is to write a blog post to run through all the permutations of optimization. What's the fastest speed to drive? What's the best trip leg length? All of those questions needed to do a proper road trip comparison.

I assume you mean 75 mph there.

In simplified terms, in the Bolt EV, if you want to maintain 10% battery, 75 mph speeds, and only charge to 55%, you essentially have 85 mile legs with 30 minute stops (assuming >150 A charging).

In practice, you probably would rather make 110 mile legs as the slower charging rate from 55% to 68% would save slop time on very long trips (and make your stops more useful). Basically, 10 to 12 minutes of extra charging time allows you to skip a fourth charging stop completely.
And (unsurprisingly) when you do the optimization, that actually shows up, ~90 miles is ideal, but when we plan for charger overhead (10 minutes or so to get set up at the charger) it becomes more efficient to do slightly longer charging stops.

I agree with both, although my model says 10% to 55% takes 32.5 minutes. My final example basically was 110 mile legs (done with 55-mile-spaced chargers).

Question for you, @NewsCoulomb, when you plan a trip, how much do you aim to arrive at the charging station with, and how much does it very either side of the planned amount? I observe that there is noticeable time saved from minimizing the reserve, but also increased risk — for example, the difference between 7.5% and 15% is 30 minutes.

In more detail, for the 1000 km trip, stopping every 200 km, here are the total charging times for different reserve levels:


  • 2.5%, 180 mins
  • 5.0%, 185 mins
  • 7.5%, 195 mins
  • 10.0%, 205 mins
  • 12.5%, 215 mins
  • 15.0%, 225 mins
  • 17.5%, 235 mins
  • 20.0%, 245 mins
  • 22.5%, 259 mins
  • 25.0%, 277 mins
  • 27.5%, 295 mins
  • 30.0%, 316 mins
  • 32.5%, 334 mins
  • 35.0%, 376 mins
(Also, I fixed the typo.)
Also on my to-do list, right now we interpolate at 5% intervals for charge speed to optimize how long it takes to make a plan. Works fine for relatively smooth charge curves like Tesla's and Nissan's, but not so good for the step-function that is the Bolt's "curve". It's close enough for now, but given that Bolt is not the only car with step-function curves, we'll need to improve that function for everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
And (unsurprisingly) when you do the optimization, that actually shows up, ~90 miles is ideal, but when we plan for charger overhead (10 minutes or so to get set up at the charger) it becomes more efficient to do slightly longer charging stops.
Yes, and longer stops can be more convenient, depending on what you prefer.

I noticed on the ABRP interface that has the option for "take a long stop here." I wonder whether, at some point, you can have selectable categories for what someone might do at the site.

Right now, the main reason I don't use trip planners to plan my route is because they mostly dictate, rather than ask. Even Google Maps insists that my preference is the fastest route, even when that is not actually true. Sometimes I want to take the scenic byway, or the forest road. Route planners take that assumption about driving and then extend it to everything about the charging experience. I would prefer that it ask my preferences, and then build it's route plan accordingly.

You could possibly set a persona:
  • >:) Mad Max: Doesn't even want to stop for the bathroom (carries own bottle).
  • :) Traveler: Wants to get to their destination quickly but does not want to forego breaks and meals.
  • :laugh: Road Tripper: Wants to spend hours (or possibly days) at locations along the route.
  • :crying: Economist: Wants to travel the route as cheaply as possible.
  • :nerd: Sight Seer: Wants to make more frequent but shorter stops.
  • :eek: Explorer: Wants to take scenic routes with longer charging stops.
If we can ever get the data for the charger costs and speeds compiled, charging stop recommendations can be provided based on a chosen profile. Just a thought for the future. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #44
Yes, and longer stops can be more convenient, depending on what you prefer.

I noticed on the ABRP interface that has the option for "take a long stop here." I wonder whether, at some point, you can have selectable categories for what someone might do at the site.

Right now, the main reason I don't use trip planners to plan my route is because they mostly dictate, rather than ask. Even Google Maps insists that my preference is the fastest route, even when that is not actually true. Sometimes I want to take the scenic byway, or the forest road. Route planners take that assumption about driving and then extend it to everything about the charging experience. I would prefer that it ask my preferences, and then build it's route plan accordingly.

You could possibly set a persona:
  • >:) Mad Max: Doesn't even want to stop for the bathroom (carries own bottle).
  • :) Traveler: Wants to get to their destination quickly but does not want to forego breaks and meals.
  • :laugh: Road Tripper: Wants to spend hours (or possibly days) at locations along the route.
  • :crying: Economist: Wants to travel the route as cheaply as possible.
  • :nerd: Sight Seer: Wants to make more frequent but shorter stops.
  • :eek: Explorer: Wants to take scenic routes with longer charging stops.
If we can ever get the data for the charger costs and speeds compiled, charging stop recommendations can be provided based on a chosen profile. Just a thought for the future. :D
We do have intentions to implement at least the Economist mode once we figure out a good way to get reliable pricing information. I do like the rest of those, though, they sound useful! I could see myself making use of them, for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
You could possibly set a persona:
  • >:) Mad Max: Doesn't even want to stop for the bathroom (carries own bottle).
  • :) Traveler: Wants to get to their destination quickly but does not want to forego breaks and meals.
  • :laugh: Road Tripper: Wants to spend hours (or possibly days) at locations along the route.
  • :crying: Economist: Wants to travel the route as cheaply as possible.
  • :nerd: Sight Seer: Wants to make more frequent but shorter stops.
  • :eek: Explorer: Wants to take scenic routes with longer charging stops.
I think you need more choices between "Mad Max" and "Traveler" because I suspect the majority of people in general are somewhere in that range. People who are willing to make quick stops to fill up, grab a bite and use the restroom, ideally in a single <20 minute stop. Maybe this mode isn't really something that an EV can do right now though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
I think you need more choices between "Mad Max" and "Traveler" because I suspect the majority of people in general are somewhere in that range. People who are willing to make quick stops to fill up, grab a bite and use the restroom, ideally in a single <20 minute stop. Maybe this mode isn't really something that an EV can do right now though.
I think that's what I would have considered a "Sight Seer." Maybe a "Tourist." Possibly "Incontinent." :laugh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
I think that's what I would have considered a "Sight Seer." Maybe a "Tourist." Possibly "Incontinent." :laugh:
Ahh that makes sense, I was thinking about sight seer who prefers more stops than is strictly necessary, such as 1 5 minute stop for gas, another 5 minute stop for restroom and a third 15 minute stop for a quick bite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
Right now, the main reason I don't use trip planners to plan my route is because they mostly dictate, rather than ask. Even Google Maps insists that my preference is the fastest route, even when that is not actually true. Sometimes I want to take the scenic byway, or the forest road. Route planners take that assumption about driving and then extend it to everything about the charging experience. I would prefer that it ask my preferences, and then build it's route plan accordingly.
:D
I agree with this broadly speaking, but I always do my own planning. All I need to know is where are the chargers. Then its a matter of where I want to go and the route is determined by that and where the chargers are located. I find most route planners to be too complicated, just like most software dictates how you do things, and the more complicated the software the less intuitive it is and then you have a learning curve. I much prefer to break out my own spreadsheet and construct things exactly how I want them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
I agree with this broadly speaking, but I always do my own planning. All I need to know is where are the chargers. Then its a matter of where I want to go and the route is determined by that and where the chargers are located. I find most route planners to be too complicated, just like most software dictates how you do things, and the more complicated the software the less intuitive it is and then you have a learning curve. I much prefer to break out my own spreadsheet and construct things exactly how I want them.
Yes, that's pretty much it for me as well. I will say that it's nice getting used to certain routes, though. As you said, just knowing where the chargers are goes a long way. For my regular 500-mile drives up CA Highway 99, I basically know where every charger I'd want to use is located, so I don't really plan my trips any more. I do enter my most typical first stop into Google maps, but that is mostly as a placeholder. At this point, I could drive that 500-mile route several times and never stop at the same charging location twice.

If that weren't enough, Electrify America is adding two more (even more conveniently located) chargers along that route. To me, it's starting to look like what I would recommend our interstate highway corridors to all look like: high-speed travel charger locations every hundred miles or so with several dozen dispersed DCFC "destination" charger locations in between.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,640 Posts
Yes, that's pretty much it for me as well. I will say that it's nice getting used to certain routes, though. As you said, just knowing where the chargers are goes a long way. For my regular 500-mile drives up CA Highway 99, I basically know where every charger I'd want to use is located, so I don't really plan my trips any more. I do enter my most typical first stop into Google maps, but that is mostly as a placeholder. At this point, I could drive that 500-mile route several times and never stop at the same charging location twice.

If that weren't enough, Electrify America is adding two more (even more conveniently located) chargers along that route. To me, it's starting to look like what I would recommend our interstate highway corridors to all look like: high-speed travel charger locations every hundred miles or so with several dozen dispersed DCFC "destination" charger locations in between.
Heading up I-5 instead of CA-99, the EA chargers will be spaced at 50 mile separations in several places places, and 30-mile separations at least once. Thus, driving at 75 mph, when the chargers are spaces 30 miles apart, you can stop for just 11.5 minutes to charge at each one. When they're 50 miles apart, you'd need to charge for 19.5 minutes at each one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,865 Posts
Heading up I-5 instead of CA-99, the EA chargers will be spaced at 50 mile separations in several places places, and 30-mile separations at least once. Thus, driving at 75 mph, when the chargers are spaces 30 miles apart, you can stop for just 11.5 minutes to charge at each one. When they're 50 miles apart, you'd need to charge for 19.5 minutes at each one.
The issue with I-5 between Los Angeles and Sacramento is that there just isn't much there. Most of the towns that are there now popped up as a result of the interstate, so they are already built around refueling stops. Basically, you have a limited number of locations, and almost no stop would be considered (in my opinion) a destination stop. I think that is the route people were referring to when they called Tesla's Supercharger build out a land grab. Off the top of my head, I can only think of maybe 8 to 10 valid stops along ~300 miles of I-5, which means that Electrify America would be looking to build chargers at basically every single one of them.

  • Lebec
  • Wheeler Ridge
  • Button Willow
  • Lost Hills
  • Kettleman City
  • Coalinga
  • Firebaugh?
  • Santa Nella
  • Westley
Most of those are not compelling places to stop. You're really only there for one reason, and that is to refuel. Luckily, the Bolt EV would really only need to stop at one or two of those locations on a trip. If I were to take my regular 500-mile trip in my Bolt EV using that route, I would probably mimic how I used to drive it in my Volt. Northbound, I'd make a short 10 to 15 minute break (in the Bolt EV I'd need to increase it to 20 to 30 minutes) between Buttonwillow and Coalinga. I'd then stop for dinner in Santa Nella Village for 30 to 45 minutes (in the Volt, it used to take an hour: 15 minutes refueling + 45 minutes for dinner). And then I'd be off. The Bolt EV would require me to make another 20 to 30 minute stop, which would probably happen at Dunnigan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
737 Posts
it's starting to look like what I would recommend our interstate highway corridors to all look like: high-speed travel charger locations every hundred miles or so with several dozen dispersed DCFC "destination" charger locations in between.
I think the "every hundred miles" is up for debate. On a regular route, every hundred miles is about right, but for travelers coming from different places, with different degrees of empty batteries, I think every thirty miles, or even closer, might be useful. It also depends on how much of a margin is comfortable between refueling stops. Usually, I end up charging when my range left is at 40-90 miles. I once pushed it to 15 miles when driving home, but I had known backup chargers on the way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
The issue with I-5 between Los Angeles and Sacramento is that there just isn't much there. Most of the towns that are there now popped up as a result of the interstate, so they are already built around refueling stops. Basically, you have a limited number of locations, and almost no stop would be considered (in my opinion) a destination stop. I think that is the route people were referring to when they called Tesla's Supercharger build out a land grab. Off the top of my head, I can only think of maybe 8 to 10 valid stops along ~300 miles of I-5, which means that Electrify America would be looking to build chargers at basically every single one of them.

...

Most of those are not compelling places to stop. You're really only there for one reason, and that is to refuel. Luckily, the Bolt EV would really only need to stop at one or two of those locations on a trip. If I were to take my regular 500-mile trip in my Bolt EV using that route, I would probably mimic how I used to drive it in my Volt. Northbound, I'd make a short 10 to 15 minute break (in the Bolt EV I'd need to increase it to 20 to 30 minutes) between Buttonwillow and Coalinga. I'd then stop for dinner in Santa Nella Village for 30 to 45 minutes (in the Volt, it used to take an hour: 15 minutes refueling + 45 minutes for dinner). And then I'd be off. The Bolt EV would require me to make another 20 to 30 minute stop, which would probably happen at Dunnigan.
I think every ~50 miles is ideal but every ~100 miles is what's really essential.

IMO the #1 installation should be at the giant truck stop in Lebec, actually plenty of stuff to do there because it caters to truckers who are forced by DOT regulations to stop after so many hours of driving, it's within range of pretty much everywhere in the L.A. area even if you count the amount of power that will be wasted climbing the grapevine, as a bonus it's immediately South of the junction of the 5 and the 99 (though I'm told this is the unofficial end of "SoCal" so it's inappropriate to refer to roads as "the XXX" past here ;) )

Next should be Kettleman City, almost exactly 100 miles up the road, some people (like if you are starting from Castaic or Santa Clarita) might be cable to skip Lebec.

Last stop at Santa Nella, plenty to do there as well including a large truck stop and Pea Soup Andersons, ~100 miles from Kettleman City. Some people who got a good charge in Lebec will be able to skip the Kettleman City stop (though I don't think most will be able to).


Those 3 stops are all you'd need to make driving from the L.A. area to the Bay area "doable" along I-5 for a typical driver in a car like the Bolt. Adding more stops gives people more flexibility and spreads the load around (reduces the likelihood of having to wait). Make the charging locations in the larger travel centers (like the 3 above) larger with more stalls and the ones in the more out of the way locations smaller because most people will want to avoid them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
902 Posts
Yeah. It is very limited yet. It misses more than it finds near here. But knowing Google, by next year no one will look anywhere else.
And at this point it doesn't seem to have any filters to distinguish between CCS, CHAdeMO, and L2 stations.

Knowing google, you are correct, they will probably improve rapidly and then come to dominate the field.

Keith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
Yeah. It is very limited yet. It misses more than it finds near here. But knowing Google, by next year no one will look anywhere else.
would be cool if they included a street view. then one can practice virtually finding the station prior to a trip. and the street view might allow one to tell the type of station
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,512 Posts
would be cool if they included a street view. then one can practice virtually finding the station prior to a trip. and the street view might allow one to tell the type of station

With *many* of the station installations taking place in the last two years (and the next few years), it may be a while before street view catches up and includes said chargers in the photo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
With *many* of the station installations taking place in the last two years (and the next few years), it may be a while before street view catches up and includes said chargers in the photo.

have all the google cars electric then the info would be updated quickly and frequently
 
41 - 60 of 67 Posts
Top