Anybody have a solution to get rid of the max 5sec power cut off

[Mach1E]

This picture is the result of a Chevy Bolt battery fire in a parked garage. You want to argue that the risk of an arc flash fire does not go up when the power draw from the motor is at full load? I work around 480V on a daily basis and every electrician I know would disagree with that statement.

If anything there is probably more safety engineering around what happens to the car while the motor is under full load than while it's in a parked state... so that could be why the fires seemed to happen more in parked cars.

Not even remotely the same thing we are discussing.

Acceleration in a BEV causing fires is as true as going outside in the cold will cause you to catch pneumonia.

People may repeat the same lie over and over, but it doesn’t make it true.

Sponsored

 

[Mach1E]

I agree with you there. What I'm saying is that this is likely due to extra safety measures placed around the motor's current draw which in the MachE's case includes the 5s limit of max power draw.

No, what you said is “you risk turning the car into a 20,000 F fireball.”

It just isn’t true.

 

[dtbaker61]

Yeah I’d like to see that too. To see what temps are “normal.”

The 'safe max' temp is going to depend on what type of insulation is on wires and solder used internally in the controller/inverter. This is why a software hack to raise that trigger temp is a super bad idea. Also why I keep coming back to the most reasonable 'performace mod' is to try to lower the coolant loop inlet temp prior to and during high power output.

The component temps inside the controller/inverter can spike FAST when under heavy load, so the sense/current control is very reactive.... quick to protect to prevent damage, but also quick to restore power once temp drops within parameters.

This guts of the controller/inverter MUST dump heat.... a lot of it when under full load; even if they are 98% efficient.... putting thru 200kW means they have to dump 4kW of heat when running full load! Since we can't easily change the structural aspects for heat transfer, the only thing I can think about is to increase the delta-t in the coolant.

 

[Ghost Ryder]

My hunch is that Ford wants to play it safe with the 5 seconds max power. Keep in mind, the MachE was Ford's very first EV... as the engineers get more comfortable with the power source, I think you'll see the GT improve a lot in this regard.

Most people don't realize how dangerous 480V power is. You make a mistake with 480, you risk turning the car into a 20,000 F fireball. The absolute last thing Ford wants for the brand is a family getting incinerated because dad wanted to show off and push the GT too hard around a curve.

Also, the vast majority of users (myself included) don't care about more than 5s of power. I will be driving this car at 0-40 in the city, and 55-80 on the highway. Under no circumstances will I take this car over 90. The MachE premium performs well at these speeds so while top gear performance might be a moral victory, the vast majority of its customers don't really care about it.

I think if FORD increase power to 110, then it wouldn't be a problem. I think cutting power after 80 is not good. In California, the avg freeway speed can be 80-90, same as Texas and other part of the country. Its just not 5 seconds of power. I would have less issues if FORD gave use 5 seconds of power anytime. Currently after 80, Ford cut power almost immediately. In California, you may need to pass at 80 (merging in traffic) and cutting power at 80 is not good. Could be outright dangerous if you're expecting power and it gets cut off suddenly.

 

[phil]

My hunch is that Ford wants to play it safe with the 5 seconds max power.

This is a revolutionary theory, that is certain to set this whole discussion on its ear! I wonder why none of us ever thought of this possibility!

 

[jonkMACHE]

Not even remotely the same thing we are discussing.

Acceleration in a BEV causing fires is as true as going outside in the cold will cause you to catch pneumonia.

People may repeat the same lie over and over, but it doesn’t make it true.

Respectfully, I disagree.

For what it's worth, I work with 480V power on a daily basis. The safety measures in place on the job are extreme because of what can occur if you make a mistake with that kind of voltage.

Arc flash is far more likely to occur in a circuit that draws a full load of current. No electrician would ever dispute that. Obviously, car engineers go to great lengths to design their electrical circuits in a manner that protects against arc flash, but the fact remains that many outside factors could create a scenario where an arc flash is possible. A piece of stray gravel could fly up inside the car and knick the circuitry in a manner that causes a short. The 5 seconds of max power could very well be a safety measure to protect against this. Why else would Ford do it if not for safety?

 

[Kevin P]

Respectfully, I disagree.

For what it's worth, I work with 480V power on a daily basis. The safety measures in place on the job are extreme because of what can occur if you make a mistake with that kind of voltage.

Arc flash is far more likely to occur in a circuit that draws a full load of current. No electrician would ever dispute that. Obviously, car engineers go to great lengths to design their electrical circuits in a manner that protects against arc flash, but the fact remains that many outside factors could create a scenario where an arc flash is possible. A piece of stray gravel could fly up inside the car and knick the circuitry in a manner that causes a short. The 5 seconds of max power could very well be a safety measure to protect against this. Why else would Ford do it if not for safety?

We already know why its restricted. Its a power/time restriction to protect the drivetrain components. Its very conservative. Ford didn't have the temp sensors or data to monitor EVERYTHING so they went with a level that they had 100% degree of confidence in. There is without a doubt room to do more, question is, will Ford open it up? And how much if so? My guess is that the 5-second rule stays or changes a bit, but instead of power dropping off by almost 50%, they keep it at 75%-ish of power, for longer. By the way, there are all kinds of posts with data gathering and whatnot if you look through these forums.

 

[jonkMACHE]

No, what you said is “you risk turning the car into a 20,000 F fireball.”

It just isn’t true.

My full quote is "you make a mistake with 480V, you risk turning the car into a 20,000 F fireball." That is true. An electrical mistake with 480V creates a risk of arc flash which can absolutely create temperatures that high. My point is I think it's totally fine for Ford to play it safe until the engineers get more comfortable with the technology. The small minority of GT owners who want more power don't speak for every MachE owner. I'd rather drive a car that errors on the side of safety.

 

[jonkMACHE]

We already know why its restricted. Its a power/time restriction to protect the drivetrain components. Its very conservative. Ford didn't have the temp sensors or data to monitor EVERYTHING so they went with a level that they had 100% degree of confidence in. There is without a doubt room to do more, question is, will Ford open it up? And how much if so? My guess is that the 5-second rule stays or changes a bit, but instead of power dropping off by almost 50%, they keep it at 75%-ish of power, for longer. By the way, there are all kinds of posts with data gathering and whatnot if you look through these forums.

I think by the 3rd or 4th generation of GT models, you will see that max power draw go up to 10 seconds. No matter how many tests you run, there is nothing like real-world consumer data, and I think once Ford has a few years of safety under their belt they'll start to push the limits a bit more.

 

[Mach1E]

My full quote is "you make a mistake with 480V, you risk turning the car into a 20,000 F fireball." That is true. An electrical mistake with 480V creates a risk of arc flash which can absolutely create temperatures that high. My point is I think it's totally fine for Ford to play it safe until the engineers get more comfortable with the technology. The small minority of GT owners who want more power don't speak for every MachE owner. I'd rather drive a car that errors on the side of safety.

True based on what? Electric vehicles have been around for over 100 years and modern ones for over a decade.

Just show me ONE example of a fireball resulting from full throttle acceleration.

If you can’t, please retract your unnecessary hyperbole.

 

[Mach1E]

Respectfully, I disagree.

For what it's worth, I work with 480V power on a daily basis. The safety measures in place on the job are extreme because of what can occur if you make a mistake with that kind of voltage.

Arc flash is far more likely to occur in a circuit that draws a full load of current. No electrician would ever dispute that. Obviously, car engineers go to great lengths to design their electrical circuits in a manner that protects against arc flash, but the fact remains that many outside factors could create a scenario where an arc flash is possible. A piece of stray gravel could fly up inside the car and knick the circuitry in a manner that causes a short. The 5 seconds of max power could very well be a safety measure to protect against this. Why else would Ford do it if not for safety?

Why else would they do it?

My guess is either for reliability of the battery and components or just to play it safe like they did with the charging curve, for the reliability of the components.


But a fireball, like you suggested? nope.

Am I picking on you a little? Yes. But only because you’re like the 20th person whose suggested the car may burst into flames when talking about the 5 second thing with ZERO evidence to back that claim up.

 

[jonkMACHE]

True based on what? Electric vehicles have been around for over 100 years and modern ones for over a decade.

Just show me ONE example of a fireball resulting from full throttle acceleration.

If you can’t, please retract your unnecessary hyperbole.

Oh, I don't mind the discussion. I'm happy to walk you through it, and don't worry about being mean to me. I think the debate is beneficial for everyone, and I think it'll help the people reading it to have more informed opinions on EV safety.

A couple questions:

-Are you asking me to provide an example of an EV going full speed that exploded or to simply explain how it is theoretically possible?
-May I ask what your background is with high-voltage electricity?

Here's a video of a Chevy Bolt exploding at high speed after it got bumped from behind by a semi. The camera angle isn't perfect, but if you slow it down to x0.25 speed it looks as if the explosion originates from under the hood of the Chevy Bolt. Without examining the wreckage there is no way to know for certain, but if the car's high-voltage circuitry got crunched during the collision, it could very likely deform in a manner that caused a short which suggest an arc-flash is the cause of the explosion.

 

[Mach1E]

Oh, I don't mind the discussion. I'm happy to walk you through it, and don't worry about being mean to me. I think the debate is beneficial for everyone, and I think it'll help the people reading it to have more informed opinions on EV safety.

A couple questions:

-Are you asking me to provide an example of an EV going full speed that exploded or to simply explain how it is theoretically possible?
-May I ask what your background is with high-voltage electricity?

Here's a video of a Chevy Bolt exploding at high speed after it got bumped from behind by a semi. The camera angle isn't perfect, but if you slow it down to x0.25 speed it looks as if the explosion originates from under the hood of the Chevy Bolt. Without examining the wreckage there is no way to know for certain, but if the car's high-voltage circuitry got crunched during the collision, it could very likely deform in a manner that caused a short which suggest an arc-flash is the cause of the explosion.

Yes, I’m asking you to show evidence that supports your theory that the 5 second limit has anything to do with our cars catching fire or exploding.

My background, and yours is completely irrelevant.

If someone asked why the ICE Mach 1 doesn’t have 500 hp, would you come in and say “I work with gasoline on a daily basis, one mistake and you will explode.”

Because what you’re suggesting is equally absurd. One thing has nothing to do with the other.

And no, we aren’t talking about a collision. ICE vehicles can explode in a collision too. This does nothing to support your theory.

 

[jonkMACHE]

My background, and yours is completely irrelevant.

I think it’s highly relevant. If you’re a fine arts major, I’d frame my explanation a little differently than if you were a Ford engineer.

Nothing wrong with being a fine arts major, but are you aware of things like, for example, what happens to the electrical conductivity of a metal as the temperature rises? If you have no knowledge of these things I’d take a moment to explain it to you.

 

[Dale007cars]

Should not of called it performance .
20.000$ canadian more for performance version that does not perform all the time. I am seriously considering sticking with my mach-e premium that i have and cancelling my performance order because at this point do not see the value .i own a porsche gt2rs and Will never drive it on the street its full potential but i paid for knowing i could.i am dissapointed in ford in this .they had a chance to get it right and i seriously think there sales Will not be spectacular. The Word is out all of the youtube tests are talking about this .resale should be dissapointing ?

Sponsored