NACS charge port retrofit for 22-24 Lightnings?

[Ekiehn]

You only need an adapter right now because the truck side currently has separate pins for AC and DC.

If you add an NACS connector on the truck and expect to use it for both AC and DC, like Tesla, then you need some hardware (and probably software) to connect the NACS pins to the battery or the onboard AC handling circuitry depending what you're hooked up to.

Maybe you could add a NACS port for DC only or something, with relatively simple wiring, but you'd still want some interlocks in case someone plugs an AC Tesla EVSE into it.

I can't really see any sort of retrofit being feasible until Ford releases a version of the truck with the NACS connector only. Then you might be able to swap in those parts. Maybe.

I agree a retrofit with NACS cables from Ford would be easier "maybe" but I was thinking of a little more Rube Goldberg design, use an existing ccs cable bundle tied into the existing wiring, then an adapter plugged into it so the Tesla NACS adapter would plug into that... maybe a pipe dream ...

Sponsored

 

[GunRack]

What if we pushed the whole CCS assembly back a bit, permanently attached the NACS adaptor to our CCS port, then had a new face plate over the adaptor so it just looks like its stock NACS?

We'd need what, 6" or so and a new faceplate?

Or... just burry the whole thing (CCS and NACS adaptor) inside the truck well somewhere and get a short NACS extension cord to attach to a new faceplate. Might be easier if we don't have depth.

 

[tls]

What if we pushed the whole CCS assembly back a bit, permanently attached the NACS adaptor to our CCS port, then had a new face plate over the adaptor so it just looks like its stock NACS?

You would lose the ability to charge from AC chargers (in other words, no more home charging!) if you did that.

 

[GunRack]

You would lose the ability to charge from AC chargers (in other words, no more home charging!) if you did that.

Why is that? Does the adapter not allow for a home charger even with a NACS plug in?

 

[tls]

Why is that? Does the adapter not allow for a home charger even with a NACS plug in?

As noted above, the NACS connector uses the same pins for AC and DC. NACS cars have an extra set of contactors to switch that single pair of pins between AC and DC. Our trucks don't.

That's why you need a different NACS to CCS adapter for AC and DC charging. You will not be able to use the NACS fast charging adapter to charge your car from a Tesla Wall Connector, and you can't use a TeslaTap or similar with a Supercharger. These two types of adapters connect the two main conductors on the NACS plug to two different sets of conductors on the CCS receptacle.

 

[GunRack]

As noted above, the NACS connector uses the same pins for AC and DC. NACS cars have an extra set of contactors to switch that single pair of pins between AC and DC. Our trucks don't.

That's why you need a different NACS to CCS adapter for AC and DC charging. You will not be able to use the NACS fast charging adapter to charge your car from a Tesla Wall Connector, and you can't use a TeslaTap or similar with a Supercharger. These two types of adapters connect the two main conductors on the NACS plug to two different sets of conductors on the CCS receptacle.

So the adapter doesn't do any contact switching at all? All its doing is passing the DC pins straight from one end to the other? Jeez, thats pretty cheap and crappy. I thought the whole reason we were all waiting on these adapters was due to engineering and the complexity of the device. But it sounds like its $5 of plastic and tin that's just slightly different than the plastic and tin adaptors already out there?

 

[Pioneer74]

So the adapter doesn't do any contact switching at all? All its doing is passing the DC pins straight from one end to the other? Jeez, thats pretty cheap and crappy. I thought the whole reason we were all waiting on these adapters was due to engineering and the complexity of the device. But it sounds like its $5 of plastic and tin that's just slightly different than the plastic and tin adaptors already out there?

$5 of plastic and tin that has to accept 500 amps at 1000V, for long periods of time, and not spontaneously combust.

 

[tls]

$5 of plastic and tin that has to accept 500 amps at 1000V, for long periods of time, and not spontaneously combust.

Also, note that in order to switch between AC and DC modes, an active adapter would need a CPU, appropriate software, and a contactor that could switch 500 amps at 1000V. Even if we assume the contactor could be purpose-built on the assumption that the software would never switch it with voltage present, it still has to internally be able to handle that much current and dissipate the resulting heat - it's going to be the size of your fist, at least. And all this has to be packaged up in a totally sealed, water-tight assembly (look at all the problems with AC charging adapters eventually letting some water in and failing - now imagine what could happen with up to 5X the voltage and 6X the current) and withstand thousands of uses over a period of years. And remember, that contactor is an electromechanical device with moving parts.

Honestly I would very, very much prefer to carry two simple, passive adapters, one for AC charging and one for DC charging, than something like that. The situation is different if all this is built into the car, where there is much more physical room to implement it, there is already a software stack to tell contactors what to do, and the vehicle itself provides the weatherproof enclosure.

 

[carys98]

Also, note that in order to switch between AC and DC modes, an active adapter would need a CPU, appropriate software, and a contactor that could switch 500 amps at 1000V. Even if we assume the contactor could be purpose-built on the assumption that the software would never switch it with voltage present, it still has to internally be able to handle that much current and dissipate the resulting heat - it's going to be the size of your fist, at least. And all this has to be packaged up in a totally sealed, water-tight assembly (look at all the problems with AC charging adapters eventually letting some water in and failing - now imagine what could happen with up to 5X the voltage and 6X the current) and withstand thousands of uses over a period of years. And remember, that contactor is an electromechanical device with moving parts.

Honestly I would very, very much prefer to carry two simple, passive adapters, one for AC charging and one for DC charging, than something like that. The situation is different if all this is built into the car, where there is much more physical room to implement it, there is already a software stack to tell contactors what to do, and the vehicle itself provides the weatherproof enclosure.

Don’t forget, that onboard CPU needs its own onboard power source. Until the negotiation between the vehicle and the charger are complete there is no power coming from either side.

 

[GunRack]

$5 of plastic and tin that has to accept 500 amps at 1000V, for long periods of time, and not spontaneously combust.

Its some wire, maybe copper, that connects two pins on one side to two pins on the other over 5-6 inches using established connector standards. It's just not a big engineering challenge compared to say the NACS plug end itself. At scale, these adaptors are not going to have a very high bom.

That's a bummer though, obviously I hadn't really thought about how they were doing the DC adaptors. Certainly not easy to get electronically controlled contactors inside the adaptor. Thats not going to work now that I think about it. I guess I thought it had more to do with the car's software side and used existing AC/DC contactors for disconnect carside. Perhaps that isn't possible on the DC rail. So... what a bummer. I had hoped it'd be easier

Sponsored