I've wondered what the stats are for L1 on the Chargepoint units.  Over the 
last few years I have only rarely seen anyone (other than myself) use the L1 
outlets. 
Because most charging stations are J1772 only, and my conversion has a 2kw 
charger (19 amps @ 120v max) I built an adapter that changes the Level 2 plug 
to a 30amp 120v receptacle. Requires the use of a 2kw transformer (40+ lbs!) 
but works well on most J1772 level 2 charging stations. 
I set the transformer for 208v input because most public charging stations out 
there seem to provide 208v. 
Retrofitting makes sense - hopefully it will become a reality soon. 

Tom Keenan


On Aug 30, 2014, at 3:39 AM, brucedp5 via EV <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> 
> Originally Coulomb (an EVSE and EVSE network company) offered a combination
> of level-2 6kW (via a j1772 coupler) and level-1 1.3kW (via a 5-20 outlet
> behind a cover-door) access. The Coulomb sales team sold these like crazy,
> so they are installed at many public EVSE locations.
> 
> Well, today, Coulomb does not sell that model, and have moved on to what
> drivers use: j1772 couplers. At all the sites I have seen that have these
> CT-2100 EVSE, I have not seen an EV that can only charge off  L1
> (conversions, nEVs, ecycles, ebikes, etc.) use the L1 outlet.
> 
> One of the reasons may be that EVSE use-demand is coming from the production
> plugins. Another reason may be that Coulomb's EVSE host software can not
> differentiate between the L2 & L1 ports on the same EVSE when it comes to
> the host setting the cost of use. That is if the cost of using the L2 6kW
> J1772 coupler was set to $1/hr, the use of the L1 1.3kW 5-20 outlet on the
> same combo CT-2100 EVSE would also be $1/hr. That's quite a gyp / rip-off
> for the driver using the lower powered L1.
> 
> So many times have I seen drivers fighting over the one j1772 coupler the
> CT-2100 EVSE offers yet it is installed to service two EV spots. This not
> only causes tension between drivers, but also causes drivers to park in one
> of the EV spots unplugged (whether they are waiting for their turn at the
> j1772 or their plugin was unplugged to charge the other plugin and was not
> moved). 
> 
> It seems with drivers not using the L1 has caused issues. My thinking is
> these issues would be resolved 'if' the L1 was upgraded to be a L2 3kW
> source.
> 
> Since the majority of production plugins today have a half-powered 3kW
> on-board charger (lower-cost EVs and plug-in-hybrids) changing the L1 to a
> L2 3kW source would service more plugins at a minimal CT-2100 retrofit cost.
> 
> The retrofit would consist of replacing the 5-20 outlet in the CT-2100 with
> a 6-20 (straight-blade) outlet, rewiring it to the 208 to 240VAC source with
> a 20A breaker, and some rework of the CT-2100 circuitry (the current
> sensing, etc.). 
> 
> After the retrofit, the 6-20 outlet would be a true L2 3kW source that many
> plugins would be more-happy to pay the use-fee to plug-in. So, no re-work of
> the Coulomb software would be needed (it should be transparent to it).
> 
> So, who could use that L2 3kW outlet?
> Many of the plugins sold in the U.S. come with a L1 EVSE that is carried on
> board. Those would most likely not work on the 6-20 outlet. Many already
> know of  evseupgrade.com  which offers a lower-cost solution to convert a L1
> to a dual voltage (L2 3kW & L1) EVSE.
> 
> But there are some cheap / less-expensive portable EVSE that could be bought
> that would provide 3kW charging (matching the plugin's on-board charger).
> 
> At $400 the LCS-20 L2 3kW portable EVSE
> http://www.clippercreek.com/blog/clippercreek-launches-a-395-level-2-ev-charging-station/
> 
> is a much sweeter deal than the $600 AV 3kW TurboCord 
> http://www.homedepot.com/p/AeroVironment-TurboCord-240-Volt-16-Amp-Plug-In-EV-Charger-Charging-Station-23075-020/205430044
> 
> I had sent a letter out to an EVSE company suggesting the the above, and
> their response was they would forward the idea on for their development team
> to see if it would work for them / be a business opportunity. But this idea
> could be a business opportunity for a hungry start-up that is interested in
> this retrofit work.
> 
> Note that the retrofit work of replacing all the existing L2 6kW Avcon EVSE
> in CA was funded by a CA grant. Perhaps a grant could fund this retrofit
> work.
> 
> I see this idea as a 4x win:
> 
> -there would be additional plugin business with the retrofits, and the
> selling of portable 3kW EVSE
> 
> -Coulomb would see a longer use-life of their already sold CT-2100 product
> (more networking revenues)
> 
> -hosts get more utilization out the CT-2100 EVSE that they already have
> 
> -drivers would now have access to an additional 3kW L2 source
> 
> 
> 
> Comments & corrections requested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For all EVLN posts use:
> http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=search_page&node=413529&query=evln&sort=date
> 
> 
> {brucedp.150m.com}
> ...
> http://www.advancedenergy.org/portal/evse/details.php?id=16&squery=!chargingopts[]=Level+2!mounting=Wall!ulcertified=
> [image
> http://www.advancedenergy.org/portal/evse/img/evse/coulomb/coulomb_photo1.jpg
> CT210x models
> ]
> ...
> http://www.repeater-builder.com/test-equipment/wavetek/pdf/ct2100-svc-man.pdf
> ...
> https://www.chargepoint.com/files/CT2100-Installation-Guide75-001020-01Rev4.0.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/EVangel-about-retrofit-CT-2100-EVSE-to-have-L2-6kW-3kW-access-tp4671320.html
> Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at 
> Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
> 
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA 
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply via email to