J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
Hi folks
We were arguing about insertion cycles of various connectors at lunch (something engineers do) so I asked the great god google:
Since the Tesla Y came with a portable 32A 240Vac charge controller (ordered the nema 14/50 plug), could just use it as others do for charging.  Looking at Wikipedia UL498 insertion cycles for Nema flat blade connectors , they show 250 cycles at 200% rated current.  The J1772 shows 10K cycles but turns off so is disconnected no load.  I don’t see the 14/50 no load insertion number, apparently UL 498 doesn’t test for that.  Do to the reduced insertion rating of the Nema flat blade (in this case) 14/50 connectors, probably best to put the portable EVSE under an enclosure to protect from the weather and leave it plugged in.  My P3 Killowatt meter shows 2 watts of ghost load so negligible.  
Stay connected,
Mark

Sent from my iPhone
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
IMO, you can now buy decent heavy-duty well-constructed J1772 EVSEs for
rather low cost, and if you own a Tesla, their wall-connector EVSE is a
good bargain for what you get.  If you just dropped many tens of kilobucks
on a new EV, do yourself a favor and get a decent EVSE.  Save the included
portable unit for emergencies/travel.  The portable units are much less
reliable, so if you get a wall-mounted one, you then have a backup should
it fail.

A proper hard-wired installation is more reliable and less prone to
failure, simply because there are less connection points, especially those
of the 100 year old NEMA connector designs still in common use.

An EV charging load is challenging, which is why the NEC (National
Electrical Code) implemented the 125% rule to oversize things to provide
additional headroom and protection from overheating.  Even with this, I
can't tell you how many times I've seen NEMA 15-40 outlets being used for
EV charging get overheated and damaged because of corrosion, worn contacts,
or most commonly; a loose wire termination.  It's even worse on 120v Level
1, with many people using the included portable EVSE old worn-out garage
outlets, or worse; and undersized cheap extension code.   Do yourself, your
family, and your insurance adjuster a favor; spend the $500 or so on a
decent permanently wired EVSE.

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 12:01 PM Mark Hanson via EV <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Hi folks
> We were arguing about insertion cycles of various connectors at lunch
> (something engineers do) so I asked the great god google:
> Since the Tesla Y came with a portable 32A 240Vac charge controller
> (ordered the nema 14/50 plug), could just use it as others do for
> charging.  Looking at Wikipedia UL498 insertion cycles for Nema flat blade
> connectors , they show 250 cycles at 200% rated current.  The J1772 shows
> 10K cycles but turns off so is disconnected no load.  I don’t see the 14/50
> no load insertion number, apparently UL 498 doesn’t test for that.  Do to
> the reduced insertion rating of the Nema flat blade (in this case) 14/50
> connectors, probably best to put the portable EVSE under an enclosure to
> protect from the weather and leave it plugged in.  My P3 Killowatt meter
> shows 2 watts of ghost load so negligible.
> Stay connected,
> Mark
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Address messages to [hidden email]
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210326/d6de38ec/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
Hi Phil etc
I’ve got a couple hard wired EVSEs, a GE with kWh and amps display added and an OpenEvse.com in the garage with KWh and amps display since we have 3 EVs, a Leaf, Bolt and now a Tesla, no fossil fools.  Adding a 3rd weatherproof 14/50 mobile home unit I got from Lowes at lunch seems like a simple addition if everyone’s plugged in at the same time.  Dielectric grease on the blades helps long term reliability on connectors used outdoors, should be better than the 250 200% load cycles UL tests to (assuming I don’t park the portable EVSE there until trips like others I know do).  I typically charge once a week with the high range so even if cycled that’s 5 years of operation worst case.  
Best regards
Mark

Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 26, 2021, at 4:05 PM, (-Phil-) <[hidden email]> wrote:


IMO, you can now buy decent heavy-duty well-constructed J1772 EVSEs for rather low cost, and if you own a Tesla, their wall-connector EVSE is a good bargain for what you get.  If you just dropped many tens of kilobucks on a new EV, do yourself a favor and get a decent EVSE.  Save the included portable unit for emergencies/travel.  The portable units are much less reliable, so if you get a wall-mounted one, you then have a backup should it fail.

A proper hard-wired installation is more reliable and less prone to failure, simply because there are less connection points, especially those of the 100 year old NEMA connector designs still in common use.

An EV charging load is challenging, which is why the NEC (National Electrical Code) implemented the 125% rule to oversize things to provide additional headroom and protection from overheating.  Even with this, I can't tell you how many times I've seen NEMA 15-40 outlets being used for EV charging get overheated and damaged because of corrosion, worn contacts, or most commonly; a loose wire termination.  It's even worse on 120v Level 1, with many people using the included portable EVSE old worn-out garage outlets, or worse; and undersized cheap extension code.   Do yourself, your family, and your insurance adjuster a favor; spend the $500 or so on a decent permanently wired EVSE.

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 12:01 PM Mark Hanson via EV <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi folks
> We were arguing about insertion cycles of various connectors at lunch (something engineers do) so I asked the great god google:
> Since the Tesla Y came with a portable 32A 240Vac charge controller (ordered the nema 14/50 plug), could just use it as others do for charging.  Looking at Wikipedia UL498 insertion cycles for Nema flat blade connectors , they show 250 cycles at 200% rated current.  The J1772 shows 10K cycles but turns off so is disconnected no load.  I don’t see the 14/50 no load insertion number, apparently UL 498 doesn’t test for that.  Do to the reduced insertion rating of the Nema flat blade (in this case) 14/50 connectors, probably best to put the portable EVSE under an enclosure to protect from the weather and leave it plugged in.  My P3 Killowatt meter shows 2 watts of ghost load so negligible.  
> Stay connected,
> Mark
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> _______________________________________________
> Address messages to [hidden email]
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210326/1be171b5/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
(-Phil-) via EV wrote:
> IMO, you can now buy decent heavy-duty well-constructed J1772 EVSEs for
> rather low cost, and if you own a Tesla, their wall-connector EVSE is a
> good bargain for what you get.  If you just dropped many tens of kilobucks
> on a new EV, do yourself a favor and get a decent EVSE.  Save the included
> portable unit for emergencies/travel.  The portable units are much less
> reliable, so if you get a wall-mounted one, you then have a backup should
> it fail.

That may be true in general, though my own luck has been the opposite.
My wall-mount EVSE failed 6 months after I got it, but I'm still using
the portable EVSE that came with our 2013 Nissan Leaf every day without
problems.

In my 40+ years of EV driving, I've had my share of NEMA-15 (120v 15a)
connectors fail; but have never had a NEMA 14-50 failure. I think part
of the reason are cheap 120v outlets with push-in wire connections, and
that I don't use NEMA 14-50's at even half their rated amps.

Lee

--
All children are born engineers. Watch them at play. They're not
just playing; they're experimenting, building and learning. That's
engineering! Then we get them in school and squash it out of them.
(Geoffrey Orsak, Southern Methodist University dean of engineering)
--
Lee Hart, 814 8th Ave N, Sartell MN 56377, www.sunrise-ev.com

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
I like your quote today!  Very good - and so true!

73
-----
Jim Walls - K6CCC
[hidden email]


-----Original Message-----
From: Lee Hart's quote for today:
--
All children are born engineers. Watch them at play. They're not
just playing; they're experimenting, building and learning. That's
engineering! Then we get them in school and squash it out of them.
(Geoffrey Orsak, Southern Methodist University dean of engineering)



_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: J1772 vs Nema flat blade insertion cycles for EV charging

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
It's true, one of the better portable EVSEs ever made was the Nissan Gen 2
unit made by Panasonic Kitchen appliances division:


As many of you know, I used to have a small part-time business converting
these to L1/L2 capability.  They will easily handle 20A continuous (G2 not
G3) and can be modified for wide input voltage easily.  I even personally
ran them at 24A with no issues.  (though we never sold that high of
amperage capability)

Note we replaced the input connection with a high-quality welded-terminal
L6-30.  The newer NEMA "L" series twist locks are much more robust than the
older flat blade style.

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 1:44 PM jim--- via EV <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I like your quote today!  Very good - and so true!
>
> 73
> -----
> Jim Walls - K6CCC
> [hidden email]
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lee Hart's quote for today:
> --
> All children are born engineers. Watch them at play. They're not
> just playing; they're experimenting, building and learning. That's
> engineering! Then we get them in school and squash it out of them.
> (Geoffrey Orsak, Southern Methodist University dean of engineering)
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Address messages to [hidden email]
> No other addresses in TO and CC fields
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
> LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20210326/7d55dca7/attachment.html>
_______________________________________________
Address messages to [hidden email]
No other addresses in TO and CC fields
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/
LIST INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org