larryh

During regenerative braking, the ICE should not be rotating (unless the car is in Low, the HVB is full, and the car is using the ICE to slow down the car, i.e. engine braking). It should also not be rotating during acceleration in EV mode. It should only rotate if the ICE is being used to propel the car when not in EV mode. Power is being diverted from the wheels to rotate the ICE. It might be easier to understand what is going on if you plotted the power output of the motor, generator, and the ICE. Power is torque*2*pi*rpm/60 in watts. You could plot the ICE power, generator, and motor power. You might want to observe the generator rpms and torque. In EV mode, the generator should not be propelling or slowing down the car. The generator rpms should be the negative of the motor rpms. The generator torque should be a small positive value, see http://www.fordfusionenergiforum.com/topic/1880-obd-ii-data-for-ice/?p=13560. If the generator is being used to start the ICE or the ICE is running, then the values would be different. The speed of the car is the motor rpms / 139.65 in mph.

You cannot reliably measure the SOC of a battery under load by measuring the voltage. When the car is running, you have to keep track of SOC by measuring the current flowing into and/or out of the battery. The car will recompute the SOC of the battery by measuring the voltage after the battery has rested with no load for a few hours. If you are going to measure the SOC of the battery using a voltmeter, the car must be turned off and you need to wait 20 minutes or so for the car to turn everything off and for the battery to reach chemical equilibrium.

I believe the HV_AMP and BATCURBECM are the same measurement. It would be nice to know how MTQ_OUT (Motor Torque from AC Source) is actually computed. If the power output from the HVB remains the same during the output power loss by the motor, then the power must be going somewhere. The only other place is could go is to heat up the motor, wiring, or inverter. There are PIDs for the motor and inverter temperature, but without a baseline, there is no way to tell if the temperatures are abnormal. If there is a short in the wiring somewhere, those temperature will not help. If the power loss occurs during regen, then power supplied to the HVB must drop. Does this occur?

I don't see a transmission control module using FORScan. These are the modules it detects: HS CAN SOBDMC - Secondary OBD Control Module C BECM - Battery Energy Control Module SOBDM - Secondary OBD Control Module A PCM - Powertrain Control Module OBDII - On Board Diagnostic II APIM - Accessory Protocol Interface Module ACCM - Air Conditioning Control Module GFM - Generic Function Module DCDC - DC to DC Converter Control Module PAM - Parking Aid Module BdyCM - Body Control Module HS2 CAN OCS - Occupant Classification System Module ABS - Anti-Lock Brake / Traction Control Module RCM - Restraint Control Module PSCM - Power Steering Control Module SCCM - Steering Column Control Module GWM - Gateway Module A IPMA - Image Processing Module A HS3 CAN DACMC - Digital Audio Control Module C DSP - (Audio) Digital Signal Processing Module TCU - Telematic Control Unit Module ACM - Audio Control Module IPC - Instrument Panel Control Module MS CAN SODR - Side Obstacle Detection Control Module - Right SODL - Side Obstacle Detection Control Module - Left FCIM - Front Controls Interface Module RTM - Radio Transceiver Module PDM - Passengers Door Control Unit DDM - Drivers Door Module GPSM - Global Positioning System Module DSM - Driver's Seat Module

You need to observe both voltage and current to determine if there is a power loss. The only way you can observe the current is via BATCURBECM. Do you see the power fluctuating on the Empower screen in the car? You could also look at the accelerator pedal sensor measurements to see if the sensors are working correctly.

Is this occurring in EV mode? A drop in MTQ_OUT would suggest there is a power loss to the motor. The BECM provides BAT_PACK_VOLT (voltage) and BATCURBECM (current). If the power (voltage x current) drops, that would suggest that their is a problem with the power being supplied to the motor, perhaps a bad connection or a malfunctioning component in the system that provides power to the motor, or the motor itself.

I ran the AC again for my commute home under nearly identical conditions to the previous commute. Climate temperature was set to 78 F. In both cases, the outdoor temperature was 85 F, the HVB temperature rose from 96 F to 102 F, and the interior temperature of the car ranged from 100 F initially down to 82 F at the end of the commute. There were two major differences between the commutes: 1. For today's commute, the average power consumed by AC was about 0.8 kW. It peaked briefly at 3 kW and then leveled out at about 0.8 kW. For the previous commute, the average power consumed by AC was about 2.5 kW. I observed a sawtooth pattern between 2 kW and 3 kW. 2. The inlet temperature of the air used to cool the HVB remained steady around 97 F today. For the previous commute, it started out at 97 F and fell gradually to 86 F. So the air used to cool the HVB was about 11 F degrees cooler even though the temperature inside the car was the same. But that was a futile effort, since the HVB temperature rose the same amount to 102 F on both days.

AC did not appear to help much today with cooling the HVB during my 60 mile commute. The outside temperature was 89 F. When I first started out, I drove without AC for the first 20 miles. The reported inside car temperature was between 93 F and 95 F (I'm not sure where that sensor is located). The temperature of the air used to cool the HVB was the same. I then turned on the AC for almost an hour set to 78 F. AC consumed 3.5 kW initially (for a short time) and quickly dropped down to about 1 kW for the remainder of the trip. The reported inside car temperature fell to 88 F. The temperature of the air cooling the HVB fell to 91 F. So the temperature of the air used to cool the HVB was only about 4 F degrees cooler with the AC running. That's not going to help much. The HVB fan was running at around 2,500 rpm drawing in the air from the cabin to cool the HVB. The temperature of the HVB reached 102 F. The HVB fan did not run while the AC was off and it did not start until the AC had been running for a while and the HVB temperature reached 97 F. The temperature when I started the commute was 90 F.

I don't use AC for my commute to and from work. It takes too much power. The last time I tried it, I set the climate temperature to 78 F. AC averaged 2.5 kW for the 15 minute commute--that's about 0.7 kW energy. The commute normally takes 1.6 kW of energy. That's a 50% increase in energy consumption. For longer trips, I wait for the cabin to cool down before turning on AC. After some time, the energy consumed by AC eventually falls below 1 kW.

EV miles are the number of miles driven when the ICE was not running. It is not the number of EV miles driven using plug-in energy. Some of those EV miles were the result of the ICE charging the HVB. There is no way to separate EV miles into EV miles from plug-in energy vs. EV miles resulting from the ICE charging the HVB. It is incorrect to compute MPG as non-EV miles divided by gas consumed. If you started with an empty HVB, you would still get EV miles. The ICE charges the HVB. Then the ICE turns off and the car consumes the charge stored in the HVB and reports those miles driven as EV miles. MPG is then the total miles driven (including EV miles when the ICE was off) divided by gallons of gas consumed.

Those values vary only slightly from one day to the next. Mine are 2224 and 1881.

You might also want to consider depreciation. In general, depreciation is high for electric vehicles. See the following post: https://www.yahoo.com/autos/used-evs-hit-by-plunging-values-could-give-savvy-124255982617.html For a 2013 Nissan Leaf, the estimated depreciation over the coming year is expected to be 49%, i.e. the Leaf will lose half of its current value of $14,900 down to $7,250 in one year from July 2015 to July 2016 (ouch). For a 2013 Tesla Model S, the estimated depreciation over the coming year is expected to be 29%, i.e. its value will fall from $74,000 to $52,600, or $21,400 in one year (ouch again). For the 2013 Chevy Volt, estimated depreciation is 20%, i.e. its value will fall from $18,600 to $14,800, or $3,800 in one year. For the 2013 Fusion Energi, the estimated depreciation is 10%, i.e. its value will from from $25,600 to $23,100, or $2,500 in one year.

Yes. Open is 1880 and closed is 2236.

You need to take the reading after the car has been off for a while. The battery voltage drops when there is a load on the battery. Turn the car off and leave it plugged into the power point. Wait for 20 minutes and then look at the meter to see the voltage. It might be easier if you leave the windows open. It should be above 12.6 Volts. You could try a battery charger and see what the voltage is after fully charging the battery. If you have the original calibrations for the BCM, the car does not keep the battery fully charged. So the easiest solution to problems with the 12 V battery is to get the latest calibrations for the various modules that affect 12 V charging.

Regen is allowed only when the HVB SOC is below 98.5% SOC. Above that, the max charge limit is zero. HVB degradation does not change this. The SOC of the HVB is a function of HVB voltage (post 148). With HVB degradation, a voltage of 344.4 still corresponds to 100% SOC. The car will still charge up to 100% SOC (if you charge the HVB while the car is running). ETE is just lower at a given SOC/voltage when the HVB is degraded.

If the objective is to minimize energy consumption, the optimal way to stop is to shift into neutral and let the car coast to a stop right at the stop sign. Of course, that is impossible to do. So the next best strategy is to just leave it in drive, take your foot off the accelerator well before the stop sign, and let the car coast until you get close to the stop sign, and then apply the brakes as needed. The sooner you take your foot off the accelerator (provided you can actually coast all the way to the stop sign without having to press the accelerator again), the less energy you will consume. You can coast in L too, if you lightly press the accelerator to reduce the amount of regen, but not so much that you are using power from the HVB to continue to propel the car.

I started out in EV now mode for the first third of the commute. I was in EV later mode during the second third of the commute, when the green line levels out around 50% from time 11:34 am to 11:57 am. For the last third, I was in EV Auto mode until the HVB was depleted and the car entered Hybrid Mode. In EV later mode, the cell variation will rarely exceed 20 mV. When high power is demanded, most of it will be supplied by the ICE rather than from the HVB. So the HVB doesn't have to work as hard and will be less stressed (vs. EV Auto or EV Now mode). The actual SOC of the HVB must exceed 22.5% (the car displays 0% on the MFT screen when the actual SOC is 22.5%) to be in EV Later mode. When the HVB actual SOC falls below 22.5%, you enter Hybrid mode. The battery now struggles more to provide power than when the SOC was higher. During hybrid mode, the car will limit the amount of energy that can be provided by the HVB to 35 kW. The HVB is weaker in this state and is more easily stressed.

I would add one additional item to the list. Avoid over-stressing the HVB. This means, while in EV mode, avoid excessive acceleration, driving at high speeds on the freeway, or ascending a steep hill rapidly. Also, avoid hybrid mode until the end of a trip. The following chart plots HVB power (red line) and SOC (green line) vs. time for a 60 mile commute. The blue indicates the voltage variation between cells, which is a proxy for stress on the HVB. When there is significant voltage variation between the cells, the weaker cells are doing a disproportionate amount of the work making them even weaker. Weak cells impact HVB performance. To function correctly, all the cells need to be the same strength. While the SOC is above 22.5%, i.e. the car is not in Hybrid mode, the blue line is generally well below 20 mV. It spikes above 20 mV when the HVB outputs more than 20 kW of power (about 2 bars on the empower screen). When in Hybrid mode, as the SOC continues to fall at the end of the trip, the blue line rises to about 40 mV. The increases in variation indicate the greater stress on the HVB when it outputs high power or when the SOC is low.

The Sun warms up the HVB far more than any charger would. Leaving the car out in the Sun for two hours will quickly warm up the HVB from 89.6 F to 93.2 F, i.e. 4 F degrees.

That is not a correct analogy. The same amount of energy goes into the HVB whether you use the 240 V charger or the 120 V charger. The amount of energy that goes in the HVB determines how much it heats up. The fans and ambient temperature then determine how much it cools down. In your analogy, you have three times the energy being consumed for the one case vs. the other. You can only run the second case for 1/3 the time of the first case for the two cases to use the same energy. Now the same amount of heat is generated in both cases.

The battery is about 97% efficient when charging. Only 3% of the energy is wasted as heat. That means the HVB is heated at a rate of 90 watts for the 240 V charger and 30 watts for the 120 V charger. If the heat capacity of the HVB is around 10 watt-hour/F degree, then charging the HVB for one hour with the 240 V charger will raise the temperature by 90 watts * 1 hour / 10 watt-hour/F degree = 9 F degrees. It is not going to go up by that amount because of cooling. The rate of cooling of the HVB is proportional to the temperature difference between the HVB and the ambient temperature. Suppose that constant is 0.22. If the HVB temperature is 102 F and the ambient temperature is 81 F, then the rate of cooling is (102 - 81) * 0.22 = 4.6 F degrees / hour. The net increase in the HVB temperature in 1 hour is thus 9 - 4.6 = 4.4 F degrees. For the 120 V charger, the net increase in HVB temperature would be (30 * 1 / 10 - 4.6) = -1.6 F degrees / hour. The equilibrium temperatures are not going to be reached when charging the HVB unless the HVB is already hot. It takes hours to reach the equilibrium temperature. At the beginning, there will be very little cooling. The temperature difference between the HVB temperature and the ambient temperature is small--the rate the HVB cooling is proportional to this difference. The 120 V charger and 240 V charger are going to apply the same amount of energy to the HVB and the temperature will rise exactly the same amount (if we disregard cooling). It doesn't matter what rate you apply the energy. The temperature rise will be exactly the same. You just get there faster with the 240 V charger. So the only difference in charging with the 120 V charger and the 240 V charger is the cooling. With the 240 V charger there is going to be slightly more cooling because the HVB temperature rises faster and there is thus a greater difference between the HVB temperature and the ambient temperature. If the HVB starts at ambient temperature, you will have more cooling with the 240 V charger for the first two hours. But then you get additional cooling with the 120 V charger for the next three hours that you don't get with the 240 V charger since the fans stop when charging stops. The HVB still cools when the fans are not running, just not quite as fast. So you get slightly more cooling during the first 2 hours and slightly less cooling for the next 3 hours with the 240 V charger vs. the 120 V charger. This cooling difference is what is responsible for the different HVB temperatures between the two chargers. So to determine the HVB temperature rises more with one charger vs. the other, one would need to determine which charger results in more cooling. It probably runs the fans faster with the 240 V charger for a shorter period of time, but slower with the 120 V charger for a longer period of time. I don't think it is going to work measuring the HVB temperature using IR. You will be measuring the combined heat from all the electronics, the charger itself (which gets very hot), and the HVB. You will not be measuring the HVB temperature.

It is not going to make much difference which charger you use with regard to HVB degradation. The temperature is only going to rise at most 4 F degrees. For the 240 V charger, the rise occurs in 2 hours and then the temperature begins to fall by maybe 1 F degree per hour. The average temperature has increased by 2 F over a 6 hour period. For the 120 V charger, it rises 4 F degrees over 5 hours, and then begins to fall. The average temperature has increased by 2.5 F degrees over a 6 hour period. The battery is warmer longer for the 120 V charger simply because it takes longer to charge. With the 240 V charger, it may warm up the battery more, but the battery also has a longer time to cool. The only time there would be a significant difference is if the HVB is hot. The 120 V charger might cool it down whereas the 240 V charger may continue to warm it up. That would occur if you charged immediately after returning from a trip. Use whichever charger pleases you.

If the HVB temperature is below the equilibrium temperature of post 228 for the 120 V charger, there is not much difference. The 240 V charger will raise the temperature by about 4 F in 2 hours while the 120 V charger takes 5.5 hours to do it. This is the normal case. I charge at 3:00 am in the morning after the HVB has cooled off. However, there are differences when the HVB is warm after a trip, i.e. the temperature is above the 120 V equilibrium temperature. For the 120 V charger, the temperature will fall/rise to the 120 V equilibrium temperature. For the 240 V Charger, the temperature will fall/rise to the 240 V equilibrium temperature. The 240 V charger equilibrium temperature is higher than the 120 V charger equilibrium temperature. I normally charge the battery for a short time when the HVB is hot to raise the SOC above 25%. There is not much HVB temperature change when charging for such a short time. So unless you fully charge a warm HVB, there is not much difference in the rise in temperature using the 240 V vs. the 120 V charger.

Is the EV Now icon on the car's display blue or yellow? Also, check the MFT power flow screen. It gives a reason why the ICE is on.

The 90 F is a very rough estimate--it is not very accurate. It depends on how aggressively the car is attempting to cool the HVB, which varies quite a bit. Equilibrium temperature is achieved when the amount of heat generated by charging equals the HVB heat loss due to cooling. The warmer the HVB, the more heat will be lost due to cooling. It can be shown that the equilibrium temperature above the ambient temperature is proportional to the power used to charge the HVB. Since the 120 V charger provides 1/3 the power of the 240 V charger for charging, the equilibrium temperature above the ambient temperature for the 120 V charger will be 1/3 of that for the 240 V charger. If the 240 V charger equilibrium temperature is 21 F degrees above the ambient temperature, the 120 V charger would raise it 7 F degrees above the ambient temperature (all else being equal). If you wish to cool the HVB after a trip, the HVB may cool down faster using the 120 V charger than just letting the car sit. Last night, the HVB was 102 F and the outside temperature was 81 F. Using the 120 V charger, the battery cooled down at a rate of 1.5 F degrees per hour. I have previously observed that the HVB cools down 5.4 F degrees over a six hour period when the HVB temperature was 15 F degrees above the ambient temperature. That would imply that if I had just let the car sit, the HVB would have cooled down 5.4 / 6 / 15 * (102 -81) = 1.3 F degrees per hour. So using the charger probably cooled down the HVB slightly faster than just letting the car sit. This is only true when the HVB is relatively warm.