21–30 of 213 posts
Instead of galvanic isolation, use redundant ground connectors that are monitored for continuity.
I'm not sure I agree with this. It puts too much responsibility onto the EVSE side, as it'll have to be able to break the fault if it happens. If something like emergency pyro disconnects are mandated, I might be able to trust it a bit more.
Lightning strikes...how do EVs currently guard against it? - With galvanic isolation baked directly into onboard charger, I'm thinking worst case outcome is charging infra and isolation link get fried, but that really expensive EV battery remains safe. - Without galvanic isolation, battery goes...boom? Hopefully without you or your family waiting inside the vehicle under some false pretense of safety.
They don't. If lightning strikes, you make a claim and get an insurance payoff.
> Without galvanic isolation, battery goes...boom? Hopefully without you or your family waiting inside the vehicle under some false pretense of safety.
Nope. The lightning current won't go through the battery, it'll just melt the conductors in the charging cable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We passed legislation authorizing spending a few billion ($7.5B, 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act), and have deployed a portion of it. Most of the authorized $$$ has not yet been spent; it unlocks over the decade from 2021-2030. One fault of the bill is it depends on states actually doing the work to build these stations; the feds aren't doing it directly. If states drag their feet, stations don't get built.
Ok. It's the failure to build that's the issue more than the spending.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We passed legislation authorizing spending a few billion ($7.5B, 2021 Infrastructure and Jobs Act), and have deployed a portion of it. Most of the authorized $$$ has not yet been spent; it unlocks over the decade from 2021-2030. One fault of the bill is it depends on states actually doing the work to build these stations; the feds aren't doing it directly. If states drag their feet, stations don't get built.
Ok. It's the failure to build that's the issue more than the spending.
Lightning strikes...how do EVs currently guard against it? - With galvanic isolation baked directly into onboard charger, I'm thinking worst case outcome is charging infra and isolation link get fried, but that really expensive EV battery remains safe. - Without galvanic isolation, battery goes...boom? Hopefully without you or your family waiting inside the vehicle under some false pretense of safety.
> Lightning strikes...how do EVs currently guard against it? They don't. If lightning strikes, you make a claim and get an insurance payoff. > Without galvanic isolation, battery goes...boom? Hopefully without you or your family waiting inside the vehicle under some false pretense of safety. Nope. The lightning current won't go through the battery, it'll just melt the conductors in the charging cable.
If only we could set up subsidies for this infrastructure in the same way we subsidize ag and oil…
We passed legislation spending a few billion on charging stations and totally failed to get any built.
As of July 2024, eight states had opened their first NEVI-funded stations, totaling 61 ports, and powered thousands of charging sessions.
Over the course of the Biden-Harris Administration, the number of publicly available EV chargers more than doubled. With approximately 1,000 new public chargers being added each week, there are over 200,000 publicly available charging ports.
It's irritating to see Joe Rogan's moronic talking points repeated uncritically in these hallowed halls. Truly, as Brandolini[0] observed, public discourse is flooded with misinformation faster than we can bail it out.
Require a coin-operated 120V outlet with gfci and accessible way to reset the breaker for every two parking spots, everywhere. Many benefits: 1. Everywhere you go, you know there'll be somewhere to charge overnight. 2. It's the cheapest per installed spot, by far, allowing way more locations. 3. Renters can safely by an electric car and have home charging. 4. Coin-op 120V are far more robust than cables with valuable…
So basically, remove isolation transformers, and feed the line voltage (7.2kV or so) through a simple buck converter into the car. Instead of galvanic isolation, use redundant ground connectors that are monitored for continuity. I'm not sure I agree with this. It puts too much responsibility onto the EVSE side, as it'll have to be able to break the fault if it happens. If something like emergency pyro disconnects are…
Are you talking about the case where both of the ground wires fail while charging? If either is non-functional when charging starts, it disallows charging. If one fails during charging, charging disconnects.
The argument sounds kind of persuasive to a layman (even one that did a little bit of EE a while back), but my gut says there would be no need to write this article if there weren't regulations or other engineering traditions that decided galvanic isolation is necessary for safety. I guess the difference is galvanic isolation is physically (i.e. passively) fail safe, while ground detection is an active safety measure…
The system proposed in this piece could probably be safely implemented, but it would much more challenging to do than the author seems to indicate. There are a variety of failure modes that they ignore. The author also glosses over a 20% power loss (to heating), which would cost money and bulk to dissipate.
The argument sounds kind of persuasive to a layman (even one that did a little bit of EE a while back), but my gut says there would be no need to write this article if there weren't regulations or other engineering traditions that decided galvanic isolation is necessary for safety. I guess the difference is galvanic isolation is physically (i.e. passively) fail safe, while ground detection is an active safety measure…