Mitsubishi Outlander Rear/front Inverter on 400 volt

[nathaniel]

hi,
have anyone experience with running the Mitsubishi Outlander inverters on 400 volt? i have looked al over the topics but i can not find anything about this. apparently the IGBT's can handle 650 volt so thats a start. also i find that the charger dcdc converter can handel 400v so i hope the inverters to.
hope someone can give met the answer

[tom91]

Yes they can I believe they shut down at 415-420V.

[arber333]

hi,
have anyone experience with running the Mitsubishi Outlander inverters on 400 volt? i have looked al over the topics but i can not find anything about this. apparently the IGBT's can handle 650 volt so thats a start. also i find that the charger dcdc converter can handel 400v so i hope the inverters to.
hope someone can give met the answer

No, as anything else Outlander-ish it stops short of 400Vdc. That applys to Charger, DCDC, Heater and Inverter. I have tested this firsthand.
Curiously AC compressor will work even up to 420Vdc...

[tom91]

No, as anything else Outlander-ish it stops short of 400Vdc. That applys to Charger, DCDC, Heater and Inverter. I have tested this firsthand.
Curiously AC compressor will work even up to 420Vdc...

Who has had all the items except the compressor up to near 400V?

[nathaniel]

thank for the fast reply, so no escaping magic smoke then. thats a good start. @arber333, you say it stops short of 400 volts. is that 390 or so? or is it more like 399? if i undercharge my 96s battery to 4,1 volt then i have 393,6 volt of charge to 4,15 then it's still under the 400 volt. do you think this limit is in software based on a onboard voltage measurement? then it's maybe possible to adjust the resistance divider.

[arber333]

thank for the fast reply, so no escaping magic smoke then. thats a good start. @arber333, you say it stops short of 400 volts. is that 390 or so? or is it more like 399? if i undercharge my 96s battery to 4,1 volt then i have 393,6 volt of charge to 4,15 then it's still under the 400 volt. do you think this limit is in software based on a onboard voltage measurement? then it's maybe possible to adjust the resistance divider.

I tested the charger/DCDC up to 398V where it stopped responding.
I drove while using heater from 410Vdc down and it started working from 396Vdc down.
I tried AC compressor and curiously it workes up to 420Vdc which is the limit of Volt inverter.
Outlander inverter i only tested by its response to my CAN msg and 12V inputs. It stopped responding with 104S cells at 410Vdc, but worked with 96S at 388Vdc.
I think this limit is in software for equipment protection. When i applied 420Vdc to DCDC and turned on enable it started for a second and then dropped out. So it works, but protects itself from OV.

I would not recommend changing voltage sensing inside that equipment. You may come to some undesired effects. Last week my Volt Gen2 DCDC went offline after a year or so working at 420Vdc. It was meant for 96S, but capable of working higher. I learned my lesson and changed my battery back to 96S. It is more managable and just easier to get spare parts .

Also my 5c would be not to charge the battery past 4.1V per cell. It just shaves the life off the cells.

[nathaniel]

I tested the charger/DCDC up to 398V where it stopped responding.
I drove while using heater from 410Vdc down and it started working from 396Vdc down.
I tried AC compressor and curiously it workes up to 420Vdc which is the limit of Volt inverter.
Outlander inverter i only tested by its response to my CAN msg and 12V inputs. It stopped responding with 104S cells at 410Vdc, but worked with 96S at 388Vdc.
I think this limit is in software for equipment protection. When i applied 420Vdc to DCDC and turned on enable it started for a second and then dropped out. So it works, but protects itself from OV.

I would not recommend changing voltage sensing inside that equipment. You may come to some undesired effects. Last week my Volt Gen2 DCDC went offline after a year or so working at 420Vdc. It was meant for 96S, but capable of working higher. I learned my lesson and changed my battery back to 96S. It is more managable and just easier to get spare parts .

Also my 5c would be not to charge the battery past 4.1V per cell. It just shaves the life off the cells.

Thank you for your reply this is very helpful. I have a Kona pack that is 98s so I think I remove a couple of cells to just lower the voltage. Or I think undercharging it for also a longer life. Maybe nice to test what gives more capacity, a 98s charged to 4 volt or 94s fully topped op the to the max.
Do you know if the power output of the inverter is limited at certain power/current level? The setup is normal running on 80s so by increasing the voltage there is the potential for higher power outputs. For me a welcome potential

[m.art.y]

I would not recommend changing voltage sensing inside that equipment. You may come to some undesired effects. Last week my Volt Gen2 DCDC went offline after a year or so working at 420Vdc. It was meant for 96S, but capable of working higher. I learned my lesson and changed my battery back to 96S. It is more managable and just easier to get spare parts .

Also my 5c would be not to charge the battery past 4.1V per cell. It just shaves the life off the cells.

What? You changed the battery to 96S? Such sad news! Following your example I have been running 108S in my car. Using Tesla charger I can charge to 420V so ~3.888V per cell or one of the Tesla modules reports AC voltage ~4V lower than the others so that module can push the pack to ~425V so ~3.933V per cell. Have been driving like this just fine and I hope that I am having similar or larger capacity than if I had 96S and charged to 400V? That's extra 14 kg in cells for me but hoping this would prolong the life of battery which is already 11 years old. What do you think? So my question is why you simply didn't charge lower per cell rather than going back to 96S? Would have prolonged the life of the battery or not?

[arber333]

What? You changed the battery to 96S? Such sad news! Following your example I have been running 108S in my car. Using Tesla charger I can charge to 420V so ~3.888V per cell or one of the Tesla modules reports AC voltage ~4V lower than the others so that module can push the pack to ~425V so ~3.933V per cell. Have been driving like this just fine and I hope that I am having similar or larger capacity than if I had 96S and charged to 400V? That's extra 14 kg in cells for me but hoping this would prolong the life of battery which is already 11 years old. What do you think? So my question is why you simply didn't charge lower per cell rather than going back to 96S? Would have prolonged the life of the battery or not?

Well i had 104S in bundles of 8S.
Since i installed Chademo charging i noticed my cells are runnin hot and i need to setup liquid cooling. Because of my cell configuration in 2x 8S one above the other it does make sense to put alu blocks between module pairs. But in 104S that leaves one 8S packet alone on the side. It is simply easier to keep division of 16S.
Also i noticed most of OEM stuff work with 96S. There is some range reduction going from 45kWh to 43kWh, but with 104S i could only charge up to 4.0V per cell vs 96S where i can charge up to 4.1V. From 4.0 to 4.1 there is quite some range, but from 4.1 to 4.2 its just not worth it.
And now that my DCDC bit the dust i see the problem of spare parts...
There was also the issue with chargers when they reduced charging power above 400Vdc.

[m.art.y]

There is some range reduction going from 45kWh to 43kWh, but with 104S i could only charge up to 4.0V per cell vs 96S where i can charge up to 4.1V. From 4.0 to 4.1 there is quite some range, but from 4.1 to 4.2 its just not worth it.

Yes but my point is do you have more range with 104S charging to only 4.0V than with 96S charging to 4.1V? And it is healthier for the cells to charge lower or isn't it? If so is it healthier to charge to 3.9v than 4.0v? From what I read online dendrite growth is encouraged at high voltages.

[arber333]

Yes but my point is do you have more range with 104S charging to only 4.0V than with 96S charging to 4.1V? And it is healthier for the cells to charge lower or isn't it? If so is it healthier to charge to 3.9v than 4.0v? From what I read online dendrite growth is encouraged at high voltages.

Yes in general i would agree that high kept cell voltages cause internal tension inside cells. Much like an overinflated baloon.
What i read and experience with Li chemistry from 2012 i would say LiFe cells tend to age more above 3.5V per cell. Liion and Lipo cells as well can show pronounced age effects with charging above 4.1V per cell.

On the other hand evidence is clear that tension above 4.1V for a prolonged time will cause rapid aging and SOC loss.
Evidence is inconclusive as to the same effect it cells would be charged to 4.1V and then quickly consumed without keeping cells at 4.1V for prolonged time.

My Mazda 2013 Lipo pack is still working pretty well for distance, but cells are sensitive to high power bursts. Some of them were destroyed by OC power draw, but were supplying charge to the last moment.