[Ovmsdev] net.c SOC alert obsolete?

[Michael Balzer]

I thought about using FEATURE_CB_SVALERTS for this as well -- no need to
introduce a separate alert class IMO.

But this really has no priority, just one user wondered why he got an
SOC alert he did not configure... I think he'll be fine to accept it as
a hard coded feature as well.

Regards,
Michael


Am 06.05.2016 um 05:08 schrieb Mark Webb-Johnson:
> I think it is fine to put this as a carbits feature to opt-out.
>
> Perhaps:
>
>     #define FEATURE_CB_SSOCZERO 0x80 // Set to 1 to suppress SOC 0% alert
>
>
> Regards, Mark.
>
> P.S. sys_features are current 8bit. Not hard to increase to 16 or 32
> if necessary.
>
>> On 20 Apr 2016, at 5:20 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de
>> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>
>> Brian,
>>
>> I was not thinking about removing both SOC alerts, just the fixed
>> one, and maybe then default the configurable to 5%.
>>
>> Self discharging rates are very low on lithium cells in general, and
>> the BMS will normally cut off the battery long before reaching
>> critical voltage levels, leaving several months of self discharging
>> without damage. All third party BMS systems I checked during the last
>> year or so support this.
>>
>> I understood from reading a web report on this, that the roadster BMS
>> does not cut off the battery by a relais, the car electronics will
>> continue operation until the battery is dead. The first gen Twizy has
>> the same problem on the 12V aux battery, that's why I introduced the
>> 12V alert. That's also a bug, consequences are just not as expensive.
>>
>> I don't need the low SOC alert at all, I use the car nearly every day
>> (the Twizy is my only car), I always know the SOC and take care to
>> charge it up as soon as possible, to keep cycles shallow and charge
>> while the battery is warm. Parking at 100% SOC is also no problem on
>> the Twizy, as the 100% mark is at ~ 4.12 V per cell, well below spec max.
>>
>> But the situation is of course different when you've got plenty of
>> capacity and fast charging capability.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 20.04.2016 um 09:15 schrieb HONDA S-2000:
>>> Michael,
>>>
>>> Any battery will continue to self-discharge, even after it is
>>> disconnected from everything.
>>>
>>> The Tesla Roadster does disable driving when the battery is below
>>> the single-digit cutoff, but I would still want a warning so I can
>>> come rescue the car! For example, if it were parked somewhere for a
>>> long term and the charge reached 5% (or even 7%), then I'd want to
>>> know about that because it's not a good idea to ignore the system
>>> and leave it when the charge is that low. It's certainly a
>>> warranty-voiding situation (although surely no Roadsters are in
>>> warranty any longer).
>>>
>>> In other words, it's not a BMS bug. Chemistry dictates that all
>>> batteries will self-discharge, even if very slowly.
>>>
>>> What I'm curious about is why other electric car owners would not
>>> also want to know if their battery was low enough to trigger an
>>> automatic cut-off.
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 18, 2016, at 2:23 PM, Michael Balzer <dexter at expeedo.de
>>> <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>> Tom,
>>>>
>>>> so the roadster doesn't cut off the battery to avoid deep discharging?
>>>> Sounds like a bad BMS bug...
>>>>
>>>> Ok, that's a very good reason why this kind of alert should be sent out
>>>> on all channels available.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks & regards,
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> Am 18.04.2016 um 20:56 schrieb Tom Saxton:
>>>>> Personally, I like having the second backup warning that doesn’t
>>>>> depend on a setting being right. It’s a big deal if our Roadster
>>>>> gets down to 5% accidentally.
>>>>>
>>>>>   Tom
>>>>>
>>>>> On 4/18/16, 8:35 AM, "Michael Balzer"
>>>>> <ovmsdev-bounces at lists.teslaclub.hk
>>>>> <mailto:ovmsdev-bounces at lists.teslaclub.hk> on behalf of
>>>>> dexter at expeedo.de <mailto:dexter at expeedo.de>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we've currently two low SOC alerts in the framework, one is the
>>>>>> configurable (feature #9) min SOC alert in vehicle_ticker(), the
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> is the OVMS_SOCALERT code in net_state_ticker600().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The latter is fixed to 5% and does not respect user channel &
>>>>>> notification configuration. Is there still a use case for this or
>>>>>> is it
>>>>>> obsolete?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Michael
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
>> Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> OvmsDev mailing list
>> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk <mailto:OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk>
>> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OvmsDev mailing list
> OvmsDev at lists.teslaclub.hk
> http://lists.teslaclub.hk/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev

-- 
Michael Balzer * Helkenberger Weg 9 * D-58256 Ennepetal
Fon 02333 / 833 5735 * Handy 0176 / 206 989 26

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20160506/aa2500e1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: dexter.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 206 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openvehicles.com/pipermail/ovmsdev/attachments/20160506/aa2500e1/attachment-0002.vcf>