Tronitys Battery Degradation Monitor is misleading.
According to Tronitys batt. deg. monitor, my three years old car suddenly went from 0 to more than 30% bat. degr.
I tested my drivebattery using an ELM OBDII scanner. The degradation is 6,5% !!?? A miscalculation of such dimensions, makes me propose Tronity to stop using the Monitor.
Best regards Uffe Jensen
-
Hallo Uffe Jensen,
Thanks for the feedback - indeed the topic is important. That is why we are in the process of improving the algorithm which let to this kind of data. But it should have been corrected meanwhile. Perhaps we are not at 6,5% yet. Could you please check and confirm, if the value changed meanwhile?
Best
Nils0 -
Hi Nils.Thank you for your reply. Yes, I´ve checked again. My bat. degen. varies from 30,9% to 9,4%. The average profile shown by the dotted line is 15,6%, compared to the fleet bat.degen = 7,7%. Why this factor 2 degen. in my car, when the range is 283 km compared to 287 km in identical variants?In todays "Vehicle Diagnostic Report" the bat. degr. is set to 0%. On nov. the 22nd. the degradation was 30,2%. The SoH tested by Konnwei OBDII scanner is 93,44% and I´ve set my cars bat.degen. to 6,5% in "Wehicle Settings".Best regards Uffe0
-
Not sure how exactly the Tronity algorithm works - and as Nils wrote its still in beta phase - but it is for sure depending on the data from your car and/or the data you manually entered in Tronity.
An OBDII scanner can for sure get more insights.
According to my experience (at least for Tesla..not sure what car you are driving):
The degradation monitor takes into account the vehicle reported range after a charge. You might want to check if there is anything unusual with that in your charging records on Tronity (maybe charges you manually added and added a wrong range info with that). However, just guessing as this was a problem for me.0 -
I never add manuel values to Tronitys charges or trips, but driving many short urban trips (2 - 3 km) use a lot of energy in cold weather. May be that is why the algorithm is wrong. To day I rode 2 km using 1,26 kWh (54,9 kWh/100 km). My second trip - also 2 km, 30 min. later was 38,3 kWh/100 km. I want to drive in normal mode, not eco -, my cabin temp. is 21 centigrades and I use the seatwarmers for max. comfort. Last week I had a 53 km long trip. Temperature was 2 centigrades lower and the consumption was 20 kWh/100 km. That is my normal winther consumption on longer trips (more than 30 km).
My summer consumption is 15 kWh/100 km on longer trips. An algorithm taking all these factors in consideration must be very difficult to make. But otherwise I think Tronitys App is brilliant.
0 -
I also have a big amount of degradation even I see no difference in daily use (Cupra Born). My degradation was 3 weeks ago at 35%. Cupra has a service campaign running which checks the battery and result is all fine but Tronity reports 35%. Now in the last weeks the degradation went down to 15% and still falling. This is a clear hint for me that preheating in the morning might be the root cause. This degradation peaks falls together with the time frame where I use preheating from the battery to warm the cabin and battery. Since February was so warm here in Germany I haven't been using it. If I use ODB my degradation is around 8% which is inline with the average degradation with this age and km driven. Hope this helps to get the algorithm better.
0 -
For one thing short trips supply very inaccurate statistics, as a drive with a 1.6% consumption may cause either a 1% or 2% jump on your car display and for Tronity.Suddenly the same drive consumed twice as much.
I may also drive for just 0.5% but just hit the percentage drop.
Another thing: driving on the highway makes Tronity think that your battery is worse, as the car reports less range on the same percentage level. Se thing with drives that go uphol. So I wouldn't read too much into the statistics.
0
Bitte melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu hinterlassen.
Kommentare
6 Kommentare