@dang, not only this heading is editorialized in a blatantly fanboyish manner, but there is absolutely no need to do so as CATL is literally the largest battery manufacturer and is supplier to almost everyone.
>> CATL is the largest battery manufacturing company, supplying battery for almost every high-end devices.<<
CATL's primary product is NCM and followed by LFP. Their NCM development is more or less stalled at NCM811 while other leaders NCMs like LG (NCMA), SKI (NMCA) have moved out further. Also BYD's LFPs are known to be superior to CATL's for higher C-rates, faster charging, and safety.
Because there is still the myth that Tesla has a secret sauce in their battery chemistry, and edge, and is not just using Pana, CATL and perhaps other vendor's cells?
"Shenxing leverages the super electronic network cathode technology and fully nano-crystallized LFP cathode material to create a super-electronic network, which facilitates the extraction of lithium ions and the rapid response to charging signals."
Are these actual technical terms, or some sort of marketing speak?
Yes, different market segments. That one is aimed at the aviation industry where weight matters a lot and is worth a lot to customers.
LFP is technically a bit less energy dense than some other chemistries but it has cost as its big advantage which is why it is the go to choice for a lot of the mass produced mid range EVs. A cheap fast charging battery is going to be quite nice as it makes fast charging stops less disruptive. Which means the utility of EVs with smaller batteries increases. So what if you have to take a 10 minute break every few hundred miles? Not a big deal. You'd probably do that anyway if you value your health and sanity.
I found the concept of Grice's Maxims the other day, and it feels very relevant. Everyone is getting triggered because this fails the maxim of relation.
>Grice's four maxims of conversation, called the Gricean maxims—quantity, quality, relation, and manner.
>Be relevant — i.e., one should ensure that all the information they provide is relevant to the current exchange; therefore omitting any irrelevant information.
There seems to be no indication of the power demands of charging at this rate. I don't have the figures to do the maths but I suspect a normal household supply could not support this. Anyone?
I'm not an engineer but I attempted to do some napkin math in my comment in a previous topic about this CATL battery. I'll copy/paste:
Assuming 400km worth of charge needs maybe 60 kw/h of energy, to deliver that amount of energy in 10 minutes would require at least 360kw charger. Charging just a few cars simultaneously will require megawatts of power.
I wonder what are the implications in terms of city infrastructure or investment costs to building charging stations for that.
However, a household supply could supply substantially more with smarter software. Specifically, currently we rate power supplies with a decent safety margin for worst-case conditions.
However, your '100 amp' power supply can probably supply 200 amps on a freezing cold day (which helps keep cables cool). It can probably supply more than rated if your neighbours aren't using much (since your and your neighbours power connections may share cables).
If you or your neighbours have rooftop solar, thats power going the other direction, which cancels out some power use - allowing you to charge even faster.
If software could take these factors into account, we could get a lot more power to where it needs to be. Currently rules don't allow such things though.
Probably not, but does it matter? When parking at home, your car usually is a few hours at rest anyway. This is interesting for charging at a service station.
They say 4C and a Model 3 battery pack is apparently 60kWh so that would be 240kW. That's ignoring inefficiency though, so we're talking significant fractions of a megawatt to charge one car.
friendzis|2 years ago
hef19898|2 years ago
j16sdiz|2 years ago
CATL is the largest battery manufacturing company, supplying battery for almost every high-end devices.
tooltalk|2 years ago
CATL's primary product is NCM and followed by LFP. Their NCM development is more or less stalled at NCM811 while other leaders NCMs like LG (NCMA), SKI (NMCA) have moved out further. Also BYD's LFPs are known to be superior to CATL's for higher C-rates, faster charging, and safety.
boeingUH60|2 years ago
prisoner3986|2 years ago
ZeroGravitas|2 years ago
hliyan|2 years ago
Are these actual technical terms, or some sort of marketing speak?
tooltalk|2 years ago
londons_explore|2 years ago
Flockster|2 years ago
Has something happened in this regard?
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35649935
jillesvangurp|2 years ago
LFP is technically a bit less energy dense than some other chemistries but it has cost as its big advantage which is why it is the go to choice for a lot of the mass produced mid range EVs. A cheap fast charging battery is going to be quite nice as it makes fast charging stops less disruptive. Which means the utility of EVs with smaller batteries increases. So what if you have to take a 10 minute break every few hundred miles? Not a big deal. You'd probably do that anyway if you value your health and sanity.
magnat|2 years ago
> fully nano-crystallized LFP cathode material
> second-generation fast ion ring technology
> superconducting electrolyte formula
Can someone confirm those are proper names of some recent breakthroughs in LiFePO4 manufacturing or just some marketing technobabble?
myrmidon|2 years ago
If CATL had a roomtemperature superconducting electrolyte you'd know ;)
Probably exacerbated by internal/non-common terminology and maybe questionable translation.
josu|2 years ago
>Grice's four maxims of conversation, called the Gricean maxims—quantity, quality, relation, and manner.
>Be relevant — i.e., one should ensure that all the information they provide is relevant to the current exchange; therefore omitting any irrelevant information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle
beardyw|2 years ago
donny2018|2 years ago
Assuming 400km worth of charge needs maybe 60 kw/h of energy, to deliver that amount of energy in 10 minutes would require at least 360kw charger. Charging just a few cars simultaneously will require megawatts of power. I wonder what are the implications in terms of city infrastructure or investment costs to building charging stations for that.
jgilias|2 years ago
londons_explore|2 years ago
However, a household supply could supply substantially more with smarter software. Specifically, currently we rate power supplies with a decent safety margin for worst-case conditions.
However, your '100 amp' power supply can probably supply 200 amps on a freezing cold day (which helps keep cables cool). It can probably supply more than rated if your neighbours aren't using much (since your and your neighbours power connections may share cables).
If you or your neighbours have rooftop solar, thats power going the other direction, which cancels out some power use - allowing you to charge even faster.
If software could take these factors into account, we could get a lot more power to where it needs to be. Currently rules don't allow such things though.
ifdefdebug|2 years ago
rkangel|2 years ago
ngrilly|2 years ago
solidr53|2 years ago
Hyundai/Kia launched the EV6 with 10-80% charging in 17 minutes more than two years ago.
They then launched Hyundai IONIQ 6 with 10-80% at the 16 minute mark.
I guess we will be seeing 10-80% times get close to gas pump refill times in the near future.
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
bestouff|2 years ago
You heard it first on HN.
nunez|2 years ago
jacquesm|2 years ago
seydor|2 years ago