RAN Rivian Charging Stations Locations Map via Google Maps

[ajdelange]

Just as there are standards for things like USB there should be standards for "Plug and Play" and there probably are. The next step is to get everyone to agree to adhere to them.

Sponsored

 

[Autolycus]

Con someone point me to the more definitive information that this is the case? Rivian seems to only say waypoints are for 'where you shop, play, stay and eat' but I get the impression the locations on the map are exclusively for DC fast chargers....

The map I posted is labeled on Rivian's site as for the Rivian Adventure Network, which is the DC fast chargers. It does not show locations at all 40+ of the Colorado state parks. Those parks will get "waypoint" chargers.

Here's a quote from a TechCrunch article:

The first of these waypoints, which will be open to the public and accessible to all electric vehicle brands with a J1772 plug, are being installed at all 42 Colorado State Parks. Each park will have two Rivian Waypoints each, with installation starting in July, the company said.

Combining a response to some of my own discussion earlier (from Rivian's charging page, with red highlight mine):

Your charging concierge
Once you enter a final destination into your navigation, your R1 automatically routes you through any charging stops along the way. Route planning always incorporates important attributes like elevation, typical driving speed and weather. In the nav, you can view all Rivian Adventure Network sites, Rivian Waypoints and select third party DC fast charge and Level 2 networks.

Seamlessly connected to the Rivian app
Know your charging status at all times through the Rivian app. When charging is complete, you'll receive a notification so you can get back on the road. For many CCS charging locations, you'll be able to conveniently use the Rivian app to authorize and initiate a charge.

 

[Gator42]

The map I posted is labeled on Rivian's site as for the Rivian Adventure Network, which is the DC fast chargers. It does not show locations at all 40+ of the Colorado state parks. Those parks will get "waypoint" chargers.

Here's a quote from a TechCrunch article:



Combining a response to some of my own discussion earlier (from Rivian's charging page, with red highlight mine):

I see, yes. Makes sense, though also of note on the map are locations of DC fast chargers at multiple entrance points in and around Yellowstone, and including one smack dab in the middle of the park...

 

[DucRider]

It would be great if there were a clearly defined set of protocols to facilitate this sort of behavior regardless of the car manufacturer and charging network. It shouldn't need to be that Chevy has to go sign an agreement with every single charging network out there. Eventually there will be lots of regional networks that might only have a handful of stations. Plug and charge shouldn't be limited to just the large networks.

Would you have some government organization dictate that all charging stations must check with a centralized database that users must register their info with and include credit card info for billing?
Would the EPA or some other government agency design and maintain this centralized database?

Their are clearly defined protocols and standards (ISO 15118). Manufacturers are starting to implement them in their vehicles, and charging networks are starting to do so as well. There still has to be one or more databases that contain the user account info, whether there is free charging, and billing payment info when there is not. Charging networks/manufacturers will have to agree to share data and the user must opt in to this data sharing to duplicate the closed network experience of the Tesla Supercharger Network. Note that when Tesla vehicle want to charge outside of their network, they have they same issues as all the rest.
The RAN will almost certainly support plug and charge if you have a payment method set up. If you want to charge on other networks, either they must share data or you will need to sign up with them all.

 

[Autolycus]

I see, yes. Makes sense, though also of note on the map are locations of DC fast chargers at multiple entrance points in and around Yellowstone, and including one smack dab in the middle of the park...

I will be impressed with Rivian's ability to work with the NPS/Dept. of Interior if they're actually able to get a RAN station, especially one that's true high-speed, by Yellowstone Lake. I think the ones just outside the park are more realistic possibilities and will be important to allow people to charge up as they head into the park to camp and as they head out of the park to go home (or to the next park on their trip).

"Waypoint" chargers inside of some national parks are maybe a possibility. I know Greenlots has 2 charging stations in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, although they're never functional. I think they were put there during the Obama administration's push to get some EV chargers in parks. Clearly the contracts between GSMNP and Greenlots didn't have any sort of reliability standards in place that could be enforced by the park--or maybe they did and nobody cares to enforce them.

Side note: Tesla has superchargers in Jackson and West Yellowstone. I'm a little surprised they don't have one in Gardiner or Corwin Springs on the north side of the park. They do have one in Big Sky and ones along I90 in Bozeman and Big Timber. The RAN design seems to have a little bit bigger gap along I90, but does hope to have a site in Gardiner right outside of Yellowstone.

 

[azbill]

It would be great if there were a clearly defined set of protocols to facilitate this sort of behavior regardless of the car manufacturer and charging network. It shouldn't need to be that Chevy has to go sign an agreement with every single charging network out there. Eventually there will be lots of regional networks that might only have a handful of stations. Plug and charge shouldn't be limited to just the large networks.

Plug and charge does have a protocol, but it has to be implemented on the car side and the charger side in order to work. EVGO and ChargePoint have not implemented it, and as far as cars, only Ford and Porsche have it so far.

The GM app has a simple method to work with EVGO and CP, I simply insert my login and PW for those networks into the GM app and it communicates that way, billing is still direct with EVGO and CP. Ford does it very differently, I pay via Ford and then they pay the charging company.

 

[ajdelange]

In the Tesls system you plug in and the charge starts. No logins, no passwords, no phone apps, no rfid cards, no retinal scans. Each driver has a credit card on file with Tesla. If you don't have free charging that card gets debited automatically. If its a debit card I guess it's out of your bank account before you are out of the station. If it's a credit card I guess it's added to your bill. This is, of course, the way we would like it to be at any charging station.

 

[Autolycus]

In the Tesls system you plug in and the charge starts. No logins, no passwords, no phone apps, no rfid cards, no retinal scans. Each driver has a credit card on file with Tesla. If you don't have free charging that card gets debited automatically. If its a debit card I guess it's out of your bank account. If it's a credit card I guess it's added to your bill. This is, of course, the way we would like it to be at any charging station.

Yup, that's exactly what I would like. I want to give my payment information to a single party (the car manufacturer?) and have everything else handled behind the scenes so I don't have to give even a moment's thought about whose station I'm plugging into -- obvious I would have to pay attention to not try to plug into a Tesla supercharger if I'm driving a Rivian, but you know what I mean. Station should prominently display the charge rate and max speed supported so I can know what I'm about to pay for before I fire it up. Other than that, I have no reason to know or care that it's an EVGo, CP, EA, Greenlots, etc. operated station. I don't really care whether I'm buying QT, Racetrac, BP, etc. gasoline for the most part. (Although admittedly that's a poor analogy because with all of their stations I have to insert a CC before filling up. I can't just drop the nozzle in my car and start filling.)

 

[azbill]

In the Tesls system you plug in and the charge starts. No logins, no passwords, no phone apps, no rfid cards, no retinal scans. Each driver has a credit card on file with Tesla. If you don't have free charging that card gets debited automatically. If its a debit card I guess it's out of your bank account before you are out of the station. If it's a credit card I guess it's added to your bill. This is, of course, the way we would like it to be at any charging station.

This is how it works with Ford and EA or Greenlots. Ford has the credit card on file. But, since I have two EVs from two manufacturers, I would actually prefer to just have an EA account and then give them my VINs and have the card on file with them. 90% of the time I use a DFDC it is with EA. Occasionally CP or EVGO, but those are rarely used on trips, and only as a backup.

 

[bowhunter]

Yup, that's exactly what I would like. I want to give my payment information to a single party (the car manufacturer?) and have everything else handled behind the scenes so I don't have to give even a moment's thought about whose station I'm plugging into -- obvious I would have to pay attention to not try to plug into a Tesla supercharger if I'm driving a Rivian, but you know what I mean. Station should prominently display the charge rate and max speed supported so I can know what I'm about to pay for before I fire it up. Other than that, I have no reason to know or care that it's an EVGo, CP, EA, Greenlots, etc. operated station. I don't really care whether I'm buying QT, Racetrac, BP, etc. gasoline for the most part. (Although admittedly that's a poor analogy because with all of their stations I have to insert a CC before filling up. I can't just drop the nozzle in my car and start filling.)

Interestingly, I noticed code from the Rivian site that is showing this type of support in the works at least in regard to associating a Rivian account to a ChargePoint one. Based on some the code, it looks like the portal will have an additional menu item for "Linked Accounts" in the personal profile section that has "Personal Info", "Address", etc. One of the relevant snippits:

({linkedAccountName:"chargepoint"})),[]),n=Oo();return(0,o.useEffect)((()=>{e.enabled||n.navigateToHome()}),[n,e]),a().createElement("div",null,e.enabled&&a().createElement(Xo,{key:"chargepoint-account-card",loadComponentFn:()=>e.getComponent("Card"),loadingElement:a().createElement(ta,null),id:"chargepoint-account-card",props:t}))},ia={personalinfo:{Component:Bi},address:{Component:Hi},communications:{Component:qi},payment:{Component:Co},password:{Component:a().lazy((()=>n.e(526).then(n.bind(n,7526))))}},oa=()=>{if(Ei.chargepoint.enabled){const{password:e,...t}=ia;return{...t,linkedaccounts:{Component:na},password:e}}return

 

[DucRider]

It would be great if there were a clearly defined set of protocols to facilitate this sort of behavior regardless of the car manufacturer and charging network. It shouldn't need to be that Chevy has to go sign an agreement with every single charging network out there.

Yup, that's exactly what I would like. I want to give my payment information to a single party (the car manufacturer?) and have everything else handled behind the scenes so I don't have to give even a moment's thought about whose station I'm plugging into -- obvious I would have to pay attention to not try to plug into a Tesla supercharger if I'm driving a Rivian, but you know what I mean. Station should prominently display the charge rate and max speed supported so I can know what I'm about to pay for before I fire it up. Other than that, I have no reason to know or care that it's an EVGo, CP, EA, Greenlots, etc. operated station. I don't really care whether I'm buying QT, Racetrac, BP, etc. gasoline for the most part. (Although admittedly that's a poor analogy because with all of their stations I have to insert a CC before filling up. I can't just drop the nozzle in my car and start filling.)

The bolded statements contradict each other. In order for you to plug and charge on every single network, there has to either be a central point to pull the data from or the networks/manufacturers need to reach agreements to share info (and the standards/protocols/security to do so needs to be robust). Who keeps the central database has been the stumbling block for plug and charge across multiple networks. Having the vehicle manufacturer handle the linking and data exchange is looking to be the work around.

 

[NewsCoulomb]

I don't want you to take offense but it seems from your remarks that optimization and estimation may not be things with which you have had much experience prior to BEVs. And I don't think you may be reading what I wrote too carefully as I never said that ABRP was accurate for Tesla. It's an optimization tool that operates under certain assumptions. Therefore, it cannot be accurate as it cannot know how the experienced conditions will deviate from the assumed ones. To think that it might be accurate is naive. And I think that this may be your problem. You want it to be able to do things it can't do.

And ABRP doesn't predict your SoC at the destination. That is one of the boundary conditions you put in. It finds the best route that satisfies your specified requirement for SoC at the destination and at intermediate stops.

As for knowing what I am talking about I will only say that I have about 50 years of experience dealing with optimization and estimation. It was not the central focus of what I did professionally but I surely did a lot of it.

That's all I'm going to say. You don't appreciate what it can do for you. Don't use it. But don't tell other people it is detrimental. Just because you can't benefit from it does not mean they can't.

I appreciate your expertise, but it seems that you don't understand what I am saying about ABRP's baseline data and information being incorrect (or the ramifications of that incorrect information). As you say, it is supposed to model and estimate trips based on assumed conditions, but my point is, it can't even do that accurately. Even when the conditions exactly match the baseline criteria. Essentially, it gives misleading trip estimates, that make it useless for trip planning and useless for learning how to plan trips.

Of course, I agree that an actual trip should vary based on conditions, but the fact that I have to input very detailed data that I also won't know until I'm actually on the road means it provides little to no actual value above simply looking at the route in Goolge Maps and PlugShare.

Based on the attached image, it certainly looks like ABRP is predicting SOC on arrival to me. ?‍

 

[azbill]

Interestingly, I noticed code from the Rivian site that is showing this type of support in the works at least in regard to associating a Rivian account to a ChargePoint one. Based on some the code, it looks like the portal will have an additional menu item for "Linked Accounts" in the personal profile section that has "Personal Info", "Address", etc. One of the relevant snippits:

({linkedAccountName:"chargepoint"})),[]),n=Oo();return(0,o.useEffect)((()=>{e.enabled||n.navigateToHome()}),[n,e]),a().createElement("div",null,e.enabled&&a().createElement(Xo,{key:"chargepoint-account-card",loadComponentFn:()=>e.getComponent("Card"),loadingElement:a().createElement(ta,null),id:"chargepoint-account-card",props:t}))},ia={personalinfo:{Component:Bi},address:{Component:Hi},communications:{Component:qi},payment:{Component:Co},password:{Component:a().lazy((()=>n.e(526).then(n.bind(n,7526))))}},oa=()=>{if(Ei.chargepoint.enabled){const{password:e,...t}=ia;return{...t,linkedaccounts:{Component:na},password:e}}return

Linked accounts is the technique that GM has implemented. I have individual accounts for EA, ChargePoint, EVGO and a few others that I never use. I was able to link my EVGO and ChargePoint accounts to GM, but those do not currently even offer Plug and Charge. That said, P&C is somewhat overrated, I can simply wave my RFID card in front of the charger and 99.9% of the time it works for EVGO and ChargePoint.

 

[Cassidy_DM]

I will be impressed with Rivian's ability to work with the NPS/Dept. of Interior if they're actually able to get a RAN station, especially one that's true high-speed, by Yellowstone Lake. I think the ones just outside the park are more realistic possibilities and will be important to allow people to charge up as they head into the park to camp and as they head out of the park to go home (or to the next park on their trip).

"Waypoint" chargers inside of some national parks are maybe a possibility. I know Greenlots has 2 charging stations in Great Smoky Mountains National Park, although they're never functional. I think they were put there during the Obama administration's push to get some EV chargers in parks. Clearly the contracts between GSMNP and Greenlots didn't have any sort of reliability standards in place that could be enforced by the park--or maybe they did and nobody cares to enforce them.

Side note: Tesla has superchargers in Jackson and West Yellowstone. I'm a little surprised they don't have one in Gardiner or Corwin Springs on the north side of the park. They do have one in Big Sky and ones along I90 in Bozeman and Big Timber. The RAN design seems to have a little bit bigger gap along I90, but does hope to have a site in Gardiner right outside of Yellowstone.

I would love to see Rivian work a deal with the NPS to get Waypoint chargers at every National Park location. Talk about a huge win for EV adoption. Even if they have to do a deal where other cars can charge on it, it would still be worth it, just to keep spurring EV adoption.

 

[ajdelange]

I appreciate your expertise, but it seems that you don't understand what I am saying about ABRP's baseline data and information being incorrect (or the ramifications of that incorrect information).

I do understand. You think ABRP's model is incorrect and that, therefore, the program can't be used.

As you say, it is supposed to model and estimate trips based on assumed conditions, but my point is, it can't even do that accurately.

The fact that you even expect it to be "accurate" means that you aren't quite up to speed on how it works. You cannot expect it to be accurate. If the model is good it will produce a plan representative of what might be expected under nominal conditions.

Even when the conditions exactly match the baseline criteria. Essentially, it gives misleading trip estimates, that make it useless for trip planning and useless for learning how to plan trips.

Again your saying that conditions exactly match the base line is, forgive me, naive, because they can never do so. Do you drive at constant speed? Is that the speed you put into ABRP? Is it dead calm throughout the entire trip?

Of course, I agree that an actual trip should vary based on conditions, but the fact that I have to input very detailed data that I also won't know until I'm actually on the road means it provides little to no actual value above simply looking at the route in Goolge Maps and PlugShare.

This says you are really missing the concept so let's see if maybe a bit of examination of an ABRP session will help you grasp it. Before I launch into that I will point out that I do have a fair amount of experience with optimization and estimation and I find it useful as do thousands of others so either you are missing something or the rest of us are wrong.

Based on the attached image, it certainly looks like ABRP is predicting SOC on arrival to me. ?‍

Let's get this out of the way first as it probably a good place to start. The reason the final SoC is 10% is because YOU told the program you want to arrive at the destination. It will, therefore, optimize over the route parameters in order to get you there as fast as possible subject to the constraint that you arrive with 10%. As I gather the route between these two places is Veterans/Steens highway or back roads it clearly has to pick that highway for best time. What does that allow it to adjust? The charge time at Winemucca. It will tell you to charge for as short a period as you can and still be pretty sure (its an estimate) of 10% charge at the destination.

So I loaded this route into ABRP but used Rivian parameters rather than Bolt. The Bolt model is probably better than the Rivian model because there are real cars out there. ABRPs model represents guesses. It tells me that I will drive 2:18 to arrive at Winemucca with 39%, charge there for 13 minutes to 65%m drive another 3:24 to the destination arriving with 10% left in my battery. Some assumptions went into this:
a)400 Wh/mi consumption at 65 mph
b)Leave with 85% SoC on the battery
c)Drive at the speed limit
d)No wind.
e)I want to get there as quickly as possible under these constraints.

Now it is true that if someone in Reno says "Hey, I want you to take the R1T up to Burns tomorrow" and I say "How far is that" and he says about 400 miles I know immediately that I'm going to use about .4*400 =160 kWh and that with a 170 kWh battery I am going to need to charge once on the way. But when I put the trip into ABRP I know that I will be using a bit more than 400 Wh/mi because of terrain and or speeds above 65 mph and that, given the speed limits, it will take me about 5:44 of driving and 13 min of charging and that Winemucca is a good place to charge because it has big chargers. I also see right away that I have a choice of Roberto's only 801 ft. from the chargers, Dos Amigos 1127 feet away and 4 other choices. I also see right away that if I am feeling lucky and have a couple of hours to kill I can run up to the Say When Bar and Casino for a bit while I charge at the 40 kW station there.

I now know lots more about the road from Reno to Burns than I did 10 minutes ago. And I am guessing that all this information is accurate.

Now as for learning something about my vehicle and the trip let's play some games. If I have to charge 13 minutes leaving it with 85% on board could I not save some time if I left with 95%? Indeed I could. If I enter that into ABRP then I'd only have to charge 11 minutes. Suppose I decide to take advantage of that by driving faster say 110% of the speed limit then I'll use more energy (471 Wh/mi) and I'll have to charge 15 minutes but I'll be 5:15 on the road for a total of 5:30 for the trip as opposed to 5:51 at the slower speed and departure at 95%.

I've now got a pretty good picture of what the morrow will bring. Will I arrive at Winemucca after 2:18 with 39% on the battery? Very probably not. A head or tail wind will probably get me there earlier or later and the consumption will be more or less than 400 Wh/mi. But the number is going to be close to 39%. Will I leave with 65%? No, probably not. I'll dawdle over my MicyD's and/or decide to put in 70 or 75% for some margin at the destination. Will I arrive at the destination with 10% SoC? No, it will be more than that. Has ABRP been a big help to me in planning this trip? Yes. Could someone using ABRP learn something from an exercise like this one? We hope so.


So over to you. What's wrong with the picture below?

Sponsored