Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Richard230]

I might also add that the 2014 Zero was using the older Calex EVC-116-1200 charger model, while my new bike uses the new (hopefully longer lasting) EVC-116-1300 version.

Which do my 2017's have?

IAC, I use a couple of Q-chargers, along with the on-board for that reason--even when I am in no hurry to  charge, such as the middle of the night. I figure the less time the on-board must run, the less heat inside it for as long. So I assume faster charging from external sources will extend the life of the on-board charger by it being used for  a lot less hours than it would be when run alone.

-Don-  Auburn, CA

If you want to know if you have the latest version of the Calex charger, look at the left side of the frame, near the charging port.  If you see a small black box attached to the cord between the port and the charger box then you have the new 1300 model charger.  One that will hopefully last longer than the previous version.

One more comment: My 2014 S left the factory in December 2013. The last time it had its BMS and MBB programming updated was in March 2014 when its Power Tank was installed by a Zero technician. The bike has been running perfectly ever since then, other than the original charger slowly degrading.

[DonTom]

If you want to know if you have the latest version of the Calex charger, look at the left side of the frame, near the charging port.  If you see a small black box attached to the cord between the port and the charger box then you have the new 1300 model charger.  One that will hopefully last longer than the previous version.

I don't see it. Can you please  take a photo of it so I know what it looks like?

-Don-  Auburn, CA

[Richard230]

If you want to know if you have the latest version of the Calex charger, look at the left side of the frame, near the charging port.  If you see a small black box attached to the cord between the port and the charger box then you have the new 1300 model charger.  One that will hopefully last longer than the previous version.

I don't see it. Can you please  take a photo of it so I know what it looks like?

-Don-  Auburn, CA

Here it is.

[DonTom]

Here it is.

Thanks!

Unfortunately, I see nothing like that on my two Zeros, so I must have the older chargers.

-Don-  Auburn, CA

[talon]

FWIW I do not trust current/power readings given by Kill-A-Watts or the Zero app to be accurate even to one "count" of current. An industrial engineer I trust to be competent informally tested many Kill-A-Watt meters purchased from different sources and found a significant enough variance in reported power. Useful for rough estimates at best. My Zero app only displays current to 1 count, meaning at 116.4V there can be some aliasing error when the current is "flickering" between 2 numbers. 116.4V*[1, 2, 3]Amps=[116, 233, 349]Watts. It gets worse as the lift varies with the current waveform making the power vary even more rapidly.

I seem to be pretty lucky with my 2016 SR's BMS programming then.. it usually cuts off pretty high. I'd be perfectly happy with a charge to 115.5V though! If I'm charging fully, it's because I'm about to ride and I'm likely there to monitor the charge anyway. I really don't think 116.4V gets you much more range, especially not for the time it takes to carefully get there regardless of power available to charge with.

Where have you been getting the BMS voltage from? With SCv2.5 many of you may not know that the dash should show an approximate voltage while the bike is keyed on under "instantaneous wh/mi". I wouldn't leave the key on while charging (headlight DRL get hot even if you ride the switch in the middle and BMS is more reluctant to close?).I mention this because the dash, the apps, and the diginow terminal all seem to disagree by up to 0.2V-0.8V from what I get from the terminals with a calibrated Fluke 87V DMM. It could be lag or how the voltage is averaged/added cell by cell by the BMS.

I can't recall how accurately my diginows are at achieving requested voltage <116.2. I'll check that tomorrow. Speaking of SoC.. mine has intermittently been wacky at the top 20% and bottom 20% but mostly accurate when ridden and charged normally, from full. That being said I usually see my SoC increase perfectly in accordance with calculations until I get to ~88% and then it can start to jump as much as 18%. Try charging to a much lower voltage and see what it does. 116.2 versus 116.4 is really quite a small difference, output accuracy is only rated(diginow) to +-1% (a setting of 116.4 could be 117.6 or 115.2!!!) but is usually spot on for me.

[talon]

I watched the ending of three charges set at 1000W, 1500W, and 3300W respectively. The charge at 1000W tapered down the current but not the "target power setting" in the terminal log (still displayed 1000W/1000W). The other at 1500W reset the target power and ramped back up, repeatedly, "ticking" past that weird threshold value. In both cases I set the target termination voltage to 116.4 and ended up with a rested 116.2V which is not bad! The third charge set at 3300W had the contactor open up at some point near the end and when checked revealed a battery charged and rested to 115.9V.

[DanielCoffey]

Do you have a v2 or v2.5 controller on your DigiNow?

My v2.5 on my specific bike (DS 7.2 11kW) just ramps rapidly to zero the moment the target voltage is reached regardless of whether charging could have continued at a lower power level.

I will try a lower target voltage in case the bike's BMS is getting in the way and terminating the charge. Certainly at 1164/3300 it just trips and shuts down the second it exceeds 1164. At 1162/3300 it ramps rapidly to zero when 1162 is passed. I will see what its behaviour is on, say, 1155/3300. While charging to around 95% is great for the battery I have a need shortly to have a maximum charge for one occasion and would really like to be able to squeeze it in that once.

[togo]

> ... An industrial engineer I trust to be competent informally tested many Kill-A-Watt meters purchased from different sources and found a significant enough variance in reported power. Useful for rough estimates at best. ...

Any word on the accuracy of a Belkin Wemo Insight?  That's what I've switched to, gave my Kill-A-Watts to friends and relatives to help them reduce costs.

[togo]

> My v2.5 on my specific bike (DS 7.2 11kW) just ramps rapidly to zero the moment the target voltage is reached regardless of whether charging could have continued at a lower power level.

I think that fits the intended use case, rapid CC charging and then move on to the next station, not dawdle in the CV phase trying to get to a full 100% at lower charge rate.

[talon]

Sorry Tony, he only tested the common Kill-A-Watts. If you are comfortable with a line splitter and hall effect DC_RMS current clamp you could reasonably surmise accuracy. He used a lab multimeter. I wish I remembered the exact numbers but Kill-A-Watts are still useful for "ballpark" readings. I wonder if any come with datasheets or accuracy claims?

Daniel, I have V2.5. Tony had a good point about not wasting time in the CV phase. A graph of complete charge logs would be useful to observe the range of voltages where the charge slows and watch in the time domain to see if the moment it switches from CC to CV is the optimum time to unplug and go to the next station or not. It might be different for each battery due to lift.. Basically I'm wondering if there is still a benefit to letting it charge in CV for a few minutes still. SoC_pct_gained/minute

[DanielCoffey]

It appears that under normal charging (parameters as installed by the dealer) my DigiNow will never charge my bike fully - it always tops out at 95% (due to the lift). While I agree that for normal commuting and general use this is not really an issue, for the occasions when I do need a full charge to undertake a journey with maximum range, the DigiNow gives me no way to do so, unlike the stock charger which did. That was the basis for my original query because the DigiNow was never advertised as "we'll just charge your bike a bit so you can top up and go". The ability to set a charge level of 100% on demand is a reasonable expectation, I feel.

As it happens there are actually other faults with my charger which the dealer actually noticed so my v2.5 is being handled under warranty anyway. I cannot fault the support from Brandon and the rest of the crew although I do know he is wanting to get things right before letting new controllers out of the workshop. "Some patience required" is the motto.

[kasmtk]

I did not realise they did not give a 100% charge option
Referencing the Diginow chargers and being in a queue to purchase one with the v3 controller
I am not certain if the V3 will be a retrofit option for those with the v2.5?
I received an email stating that they are no longer working with Zero Motorcycles as their charging systems are improved, recommending the Energica M/C
I must now look elsewhere for a quick charging solution, perhaps the Elcon option with a Thunderstruck controller.

[DanielCoffey]

As far as I know, the v3.0 is backwards compatible with the v2.5 as it is just the controller box itself that differs. It should be a drop in replacement according to my dealer.

Once I can get the replacement controller, it will make a very nice charging solution for my Zero.

[BrianTRice@gmail.com]

The DigiNow units can definitely charge to 100% SoC (116.2VDC at-rest) if configured normally and operating right.

[talon]

I received an email stating that they are no longer working with Zero Motorcycles as their charging systems are improved, recommending the Energica M/C

No longer "working with" Zero is open to interpretation. Did you paraphrase? I think this means they are no longer developing new products for Zero's and switched focus, but this can give people the impression that something bad has happened immediately. Maybe not taking new orders and fulfilling old? They do allow charging to 100% but I foresee as our cells age we might have to manually lower charging rates as V2.5 is written using healthy batteries IR lift tables and I doubt it adjusts. Or perhaps it will never exceed that lift and actively manages it during charge.

It appears that under normal charging (parameters as installed by the dealer) my DigiNow will never charge my bike fully - it always tops out at 95% (due to the lift).

For the record my bike sometimes stops changing it's display SoC between at 87-95%. I have seen it get stuck at 95% all the way to rested 116.2. After keying the bike on and off a couple times it updated to 100%. I think <20% and >80% the SoC display is even less accurate.

My bike under the same conditions will sometimes open the contactor early (but not as early as 115.5V rested) and sometimes trickle charge and compensate for lift probably split 50-50. Unplugging and plugging back in is the tried and true method to reaching 100% even with the calex onboard charger (one more close contactor charging session). My onboard charger only charged to 115.9 as well until replugged. This may be a compound issue between BMS/contactor scheme and your control unit, but it does seem abnormally low (115.5). I wonder if 14C battery temperature has anything to do with it (not particularly cold, but perhaps upper bound of not-charging-to-full rules?). Sorry I can only offer speculation. If you do manage to get to 115.9 or so.. realize even linearly estimated (which is not correct, it is actually even less at upper bound due to curve) Δ0.3V@116.0V is about 1% and simply riding or parking your bike in the sun for a bit can have the same effect to your capacity due to temperature increase.

Try and see if you hear the click of the bike's contactor opening first or see the control unit stay at 0W and not ramp back up first, or just have diginow look at it.