<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">Wait, your understanding is that the 1146 is a false positive?</div></blockquote><br class=""></div>My understanding is that both 1144 and 1146 may false positive. Tesla classify them as DMC (debug only messages) and don’t display them on the car VDS screen (although they are stored in the logs). When looking at vehicle logs, I have seen these two errors back to the birth of the cars. Almost from when they left the factory floor.<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">The folks on TMC generally conclude that the error is related to the under-spec'd connector under the PEM that drives the motor, and that the connector pins need to be replaced (both sides).</div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>I tend to agree with the root cause, although not necessarily the suggested action. The best guess is that the car is measuring current flow through fans, and if it is too high (indicating increased resistance in the wiring/connectors, or the fans themselves), it alerts. IMHO, the issue is that the thresholds in the firmware are too aggressive.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">To be fair, I was also getting some 1116 events in the log a while ago, and they seemed to have amounted to nothing and mostly have gone away on their own. I've also gotten a number of 104s and 3001s, which nobody seems to think are important.</div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>Have a look at ovms_server_tr.vece in the Open-Vehicles-Server project. That contains textual messages for the error codes we know of. Tesla don’t announce on the CAN bus whether the alert is debug only, or real, and we can only use the DMC prefix we have seen to guess. The VDS firmware appears to contain a lookup table (code -> message and debug/user flag), but efforts to decode that in an automated way have failed. So, the current server logic is to not notify DMC prefixed alerts.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>We don’t have 1116, 104, or 3001 in the ovms_server_tr.vece, so for those we would just notify the alert code without a message. We also cannot know if they are debug only DMC or not.</div><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">When was the server code updated? </div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I think a week or so ago. The git change was October 16th (Hong Kong time).</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">In my opinion, the 1144 and 1146 do need to be passed through</div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>Quite frankly, over the years they have caused me a large support workload (with emails going back and forth, trying to explain each new case). Certainly the #1 support question for roadsters. If I had a dollar for every time a roadster owner has asked what these are and what they can do about them… Sad thing is that the only option is the spend $$$ to replace the connectors and fans, and even then that may not silence the alerts.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>I did a quick check of last month’s server logs - in 20 days, the <a href="http://api.openvehicles.com" class="">api.openvehicles.com</a> server saw 2,592 of these (1144, 1146) alerts coming from about 1/4 of the Roadsters connecting in that time period.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>I’ve also had some upset users. They sold the car, then the new owner sees these alerts in OVMS and complains. My response is ’the car is raising those alerts’, but I can’t easily explain why the car is not showing these debugging-only alerts on the VDS; It is only OVMS that is showing them.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Putting the alert message lookup table in the OVMS module firmware (which wasn’t possible in v2 due to size constraints) would solve this, and make it configurable on the module, but wouldn’t solve the problem for cars running older OVMS firmware. I would still get the support calls.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">Matching the limitations of the in-car VMS and decade-old diagnostic code is not high on my list of project objectives.</div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Actually, it is. We have gone to huge lengths (for example, matching integer only km/miles conversion algorithms) to make sure we display the same, or as close as possible, to the VDS. Otherwise, again the support call comes in “why does OVMS say 112km range, but the car says 111km?).</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">If nothing else, we really should ask the Roadster community about silencing these alerts. </div></blockquote><br class=""></div><div>I am happy to revert and let these through, so long as somebody else steps forward and takes on Roadster support. I am also happy to modify the server code, and make it kludgy configurable on a vehicle-by-vehicle basis (by changing ovms_server.conf to list the exception vehicle IDs). But I would rather the default (including for those with older firmware) be to not show alerts that are not shown on the VDS.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Regards, Mark.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 31 Oct 2019, at 10:20 AM, Greg D. <<a href="mailto:gregd2350@gmail.com" class="">gregd2350@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
Wait, your understanding is that the 1146 is a false positive?
That's <i class="">not</i> the impression I was given by the service center
crew and others.<br class="">
<br class="">
After consulting with the folks in Fremont, the SC is recommending
that I replace the fan motor assembly (USD $998.00). The folks on
TMC generally conclude that the error is related to the under-spec'd
connector under the PEM that drives the motor, and that the
connector pins need to be replaced (both sides). It is
insertion-cycled every year with the Annual Maintenance, but is only
rated for a few dozen cycles, and it's being operated at nearly full
current (no de-rating). A failure certain to happen.<br class="">
<br class="">
A few years ago I was getting 1144 alerts (in the cabin!), and
eventually found that the contacts on said connector had in fact
burned, and I had to replace the cable AND PEM. Normally a $10k
repair, but they found a refurbished PEM and swapped them for cost
of the pins and labor. Still an expensive repair at nearly a
grand. So you can see why I'm a little concerned about those events
in particular. <br class="">
<br class="">
To be fair, I was also getting some 1116 events in the log a while
ago, and they seemed to have amounted to nothing and mostly have
gone away on their own. I've also gotten a number of 104s and
3001s, which nobody seems to think are important.<br class="">
<br class="">
When was the server code updated? The last 1146 alert here was on
10/15. Interestingly, I've had both 104 and 3001 alerts since
then. They appear to be ignorable, and those are not shown in the
car, same as the 1146. How are these alerts categorized? I think
we have some of the logic backwards. In my opinion, the 1144 and
1146 do need to be passed through. I can sleep without the 104 and
3001, but it's good to keep a pulse on their frequency, just in case
there's a sudden up-tick. I'm actually a little more annoyed about
the Possible Theft / Flatbed alerts - they seem to have increased in
frequency since this past spring (before the roll-over), and wonder
if the GPS module is starting to fail.<br class="">
<br class="">
If nothing else, we really should ask the Roadster community about
silencing these alerts. I really want to know what's going on with
the car. Matching the limitations of the in-car VMS and decade-old
diagnostic code is not high on my list of project objectives. We
can do a lot better than that.<br class="">
<br class="">
Greg<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Mark Webb-Johnson wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:618FB8D2-D47D-4C9B-A3CE-80622CFD7B53@webb-johnson.net" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
The server doesn’t have any per-vehicle configuration (other than
authentication), so not sure how this could be easily done server
side.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">A kludge might be to pickup the notification event
in a javascript on the module, and then raise a new different
textual event for specific IDs - but not sure if the vehicle
module javascript framework gets enough about the raised
notification in order to do that.<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">An alternate kludge would be to manually list
vehicle IDs to be exempted from the DMC policy in the
ovms_server.conf file, and have code to check that in
ovms_server.pl.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">But, that said, I’m not really sure why we would
want this. Our goal has always been to mirror what it says on
the little VDS in the car, and that doesn’t show these
debug-only alerts. The solution we have is not perfect, but it
does avoid the worst of them. I have received so many support
questions and concerns from roadster users of OVMS asking
about these over the years - Tesla is aware that they false
positive so labelled them as debug-only, so why would we want
to bombard the user with these alerts every time he
drives/charges the car?</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Regards, Mark.<br class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 31 Oct 2019, at 7:39 AM, Greg D. <<a href="mailto:gregd2350@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">gregd2350@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""> Bummer.<br class="">
<br class="">
Can we make this configurable? While I understand
that debug messages aren't intended to be seen by the
user, in the 10 years since these cars launched we
have come to know a lot more about some of the, um,
"quirks" in their design. These alerts can be
important! <br class="">
<br class="">
Greg<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Mark Webb-Johnson wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:88DCC239-0EA3-464C-9026-F7FBBE692A81@webb-johnson.net" class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8" class="">
Greg,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Yes, this change to the server code:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<blockquote style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none;
padding: 0px;" class="">
<div class="">* bcc02c27 Ignore DMC push alert
messages</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">That won’t notify debug-only
messages, but will still continue to notify the
user-visible ones (to better mimick the
behaviour in the car itself). Including, for the
roadster:</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<div class="">
<ul class="MailOutline">
<li class="">1144=DMC: Powertrain Problem
Service Required</li>
<li class="">1146=DMC: Motor Fan Problem</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Regards, Mark.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On 31 Oct 2019, at 7:01 AM, Greg
D. <<a href="mailto:gregd2350@gmail.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">gregd2350@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div class="">Hi folks (Mark, probably),<br class="">
<br class="">
Interesting... My Tesla Roadster has been
having trouble with its PEM<br class="">
fan, causing a bunch of 1146 Alerts to be
generated while driving and/or<br class="">
charging. I've been monitoring the
situation via OVMSv3. <br class="">
<br class="">
The alerts suddenly stopped a bit over a
week ago. Other events<br class="">
continue to be received (charge start,
stop, key in / door open, etc.),<br class="">
but not the 1146's. I do a monthly
download of the car logs, and to my<br class="">
surprise (and disappointment), the 1146s
are still happening.<br class="">
<br class="">
Was there a change to the plumbing
somewhere such that these diagnostic<br class="">
alerts (perhaps versus user-visible
events) are now being filtered out? <br class="">
<br class="">
Thanks,<br class="">
<br class="">
Greg<br class="">
<br class="">
_______________________________________________<br class="">
OvmsDev mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a><br class="">
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre class="" wrap="">_______________________________________________
OvmsDev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com" moz-do-not-send="true">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev" moz-do-not-send="true">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">
OvmsDev mailing list<br class="">
<a href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com" class="" moz-do-not-send="true">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a><br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre wrap="" class="">_______________________________________________
OvmsDev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">OvmsDev mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com" class="">OvmsDev@lists.openvehicles.com</a><br class="">http://lists.openvehicles.com/mailman/listinfo/ovmsdev<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>