GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars • Hacker News Board

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#401

Post by mellavora » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #359

sailingparrot wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For the time being, rare or not, they post a much larger problem to deal with when they do occur. It seems to me that being harder to put off but occurring less frequently, and most importantly not exploding (leaving significant amount of time for occupants to get out, if they are able) is a pretty good trade off.

> It seems to me that being harder to put off but occurring less frequently, and most importantly not exploding (leaving significant amount of time for occupants to get out, if they are able) is a pretty good trade off. It's very rare to get a gas tank to explode (as others have pointed out). You need to have very little fuel (or better, none at all) in the tank before a spark will cause explosions. Take a 2l plastic…

How long would you suggest those tongs should be, to ensure a safe distance? For the ones that go bang.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#402

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 1:49 PM UTC

dredmorbius wrote: post #289

jimmaswell wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We get by fine without rigorous inspections, and they amount to a regressive tax like a lot of other fees related to keeping a car.

Death by burning from an exploding battery from an uninspected, poorly-mainteained car in the garage of your shared low-rent apartment building is also a regressive tax. I'll take the inspections.

[deleted]

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#403

Post by SamBam » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 1:55 PM UTC

bananasbandanas wrote: post #358

nickik wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No but there are always multiple supercharges at each station. > it'll make sense to just designate the last 10% of battery as "reserve" and not count it in the battery level indicator. Very questionable? Why would you do that? We don't do that for gas cars either.

Every ICE car I've ever driven did exactly that with the 'reserve' where the needle is already at (or below) the zero line but you still get about 50 km of range.

I've been wondering about that with the cars with digital displays, particularly the ones that report your estimated remaining miles.

I once, embarrassingly, found myself on the highway with an empty tank of gas and 20 miles to the next gas station. I watched the estimated miles remaining indicator tick down mile after mile, ticking precisely my passage. At 3 miles estimated remaining, I pulled over because there was a very wide safe shoulder, and I didn't want to putter out in a less-safe spot.

I don't want to try the experiment of letting it tick down to zero and seeing if I still have 10 miles or so left.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#404

Post by jinto36 » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 2:11 PM UTC

I've ended up having to explain the difference between Li-ion and NiMh batteries to people a bunch of times, and why lithium batteries often seem to have a longer service life, and have started to describe the general situation as "The penalty for a poor charge controller design with NiMh is the battery doesn't work for as long, but for lithium ion the penalty is that the battery catches on fire. So more design effort goes into lithium battery chargers". This is independent of other differences in the tech, such as power density. NiMh can last a long time with a good charge controller.

However, for cars it seems like the need for marketing to push range numbers as far as possible led to compromising the safety envelope. I've got two first-gen Honda Insights (2000 and 2002), which of course was a battery-assist hybrid with a small NiMh pack in the back. The OEM charge controller does a poor job of managing the pack, they often end up unbalanced, and most cars had the pack replaced once under warranty at about 10 years of service. The DIY community of course stepped in and produced aftermarket plug-in chargers that we wire to the pack to trickle charge- individual cell status isn't managed since you're just wired to the whole pack- the strategy is to just trickle charge it until the whole battery voltage gets to a certain level, which means some cells in good shape are still being charged that whole time and that excess energy gets dumped to heat. But of course unlike with LiIon, they don't catch on fire ;). Of course all-electrics have batteries much larger than the original Insight, and require the power density of LiIon. It's just an interesting contrast between the battery types with respect to battery management strategies.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#405

Post by lelanthran » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 2:15 PM UTC

mellavora wrote: post #401

lelanthran wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems to me that being harder to put off but occurring less frequently, and most importantly not exploding (leaving significant amount of time for occupants to get out, if they are able) is a pretty good trade off. It's very rare to get a gas tank to explode (as others have pointed out). You need to have very little fuel (or better, none at all) in the tank before a spark will cause explosions. Take a 2l plastic…

How long would you suggest those tongs should be, to ensure a safe distance? For the ones that go bang.

> How long would you suggest those tongs should be, to ensure a safe distance? For the ones that go bang.

I'm hesitant to answer in case some tries this and gets hurt.

I used a flexible claw (one like this: https://www.amazon.com/Flexible-Claw-Automotive-Mechanic-Gen...) inserted into a standard copper pipe (used for taps and other plumbing) to stiffen the spring and held it at arms length.

So, about 2m was safe for me. I also suggest wearing protection for your ears as these are really loud bangs, and protection for your eyes as well (it is an explosion, after all).

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#406

Post by cptskippy » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 2:24 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #237

cptskippy wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don't agree with your statement, I do think the Volt platform was the best Hybrid platform and GM should have scaled it up for their Trucks and SUVs. The instant torque provided by the electric motor and the ability to switch to just EV mode and run silent would have been killer for ORV enthusiasts and hunters.

There are other decent PHEVs now, it's no longer a distinguishing feature. And the Volt was never the 'EV with a range extending ICE' that it was portrayed as, anyway. It directly connects the ICE to the wheels when called for.

> And the Volt was never the 'EV with a range extending ICE' that it was portrayed as, anyway.

That isn't true, the Gen1 Volt did.

The Gen1 and Gen2 Volts were very different AND they were very different from other hybrids.

The Gen1 Volt uses a single planetary gear similar to the Toyota and Ford Hybrids but had two electric motors referred to as the traction and generation motors. There was a clutch connecting the ICE to the generation motor and two clutches connecting the generation motor to the planetary gear. Under most operating conditions the ICE was off and physically disconnected from the generation motor and drivetrain.

The Gen1 Volt would operate in pure EV mode using just the traction motor at low speeds or using both electric motors at higher speeds until the pack depleted to a predetermined buffer level.

When the pack was depleted down to the buffer level, the generation motor would be disengaged from the drivetrain and couple to the ICE, the ICE would kick on and operate in Range Extending mode generating power via the generation motor for the traction motor. The ICE would operate with a wide open throttle at peak efficiency but physically disconnected from the drivetrain.

When in Range Extending mode, if you had a high power demand (e.g. operating at 100mph) then one of clutches would connect the generation motor to the planetary gear to allow the ICE to provide power to the drivetrain.

In the Gen1 Volt the vehicle could not be driven just by the ICE and undermost circumstances the ICE only acted to generate electricity and not to directly drive the wheels.

In the Gen2 Volt they switched to a dual planetary gear system with just two clutches that allowed for greater flexibility and efficiency but eliminated the ability run in Range Extending mode where the ICE was only used to generate electricity.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#407

Post by rootusrootus » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 2:51 PM UTC

ksm1717 wrote: post #311

rootusrootus wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If nobody buys a new car, how do you expect there to be any used ones?

Idk I drive my grandfathers old car and I think most people have at least 2 grandfathers

Where did your grandfather get his car? From his grandfather?

In any case, both of my grandfathers have been dead many years. And I assure you, the last cars they owned (which were manufactured in the 60s) are not what we want on the roads today.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#408

Post by vel0city » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 3:13 PM UTC

nickik wrote: post #363

vel0city wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhat, it has Super Cruise which is hands-free driving on highways. They're not trying to handle intersections, just the simpler long-haul kind of highway driving. It is a similar thing with Ford's Blue Cruise.

Bolt doesn't have Super Cruise unless I'm totally misinformed.

The Bolt EV only has Adaptive Cruise Control optional but the Bolt EUV can be optioned with Super Cruise. Its the second card on the website.

https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/bolt-euv

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#409

Post by ineedasername » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 4:33 PM UTC

jimmaswell wrote: post #207

InvertedRhodium wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and is only on the road because someone paid some mechanic off to look the other way during a state vehicle inspection for the past 5 years. Making mechanics liable - maybe jointly as a business and an individual - for their failure to inspect vehicles properly would be a pretty simple mechanic to reduce this risk.

These inspections are nothing but pointless revenue generation for the state, checking for the check engine light and inspecting 1 wheel at most usually. Lots of states don't even have them.

My state has inspections, but does not charge for them.

Re: GM tells some Bolt owners to park 50 feet away from other cars

#410

Post by bratcomplex » Thu, Sep 16, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #356

gpm wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cars shape and structural components are designed around the battery. The cars software, motors, charging electronics, software, cooling systems, etc are all designed for the specific battery. The battery eats up a significant fraction of the cost of the car, and the systems designed around it a significant fraction of the remainder. Asking for interoperable batteries between vehicle brands is like asking for int…

> Asking for interoperable batteries between vehicle brands is like asking for interoperable engines between vehicle brands, it's ridiculous. Engines are interoperable to a large degree; you can switch out the engine+ecu of your car for the engine+ecu of another car more easily than you'd think because the majority of the effort will be in changes requiring an adapter plate and shaft for the transmission. There are h…

Batteries are to the same degree. if you really wanted to, you could take a bunch of liquid cooled Tesla modules and fit them in a old leaf, when it’s batteries degrade.