Smart Car of America Forum banner

21 - 38 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
Question about Campaign SM-SC-2016060002, July 2016
Is there a way to check if your car has this update done through a Autel scanner?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #24
Unlikely. My scans of the battery pack using the open source device provide no BMS software version information.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
Unlikely. My scans of the battery pack using the open source device provide no BMS software version information.
There is a line in the open source output for Battery HW and SW version:
Code:
Rev.[Y/WK/PL] HW:2013/29/0, SW:2013/29/1

@sokoloff, can you do a scan on the updated car and see if that line changed versus prior log files?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
(He sent me the files offline.)

Here is the Battery SW revision line from the tool prior to applying the software patch:
Code:
Rev.[Y/WK/PL] HW:2013/29/0, SW:2013/29/1
Here is the Battery SW revision line after applying the software patch (from the same car):
Code:
Rev.[Y/WK/PL] HW:2013/29/0, SW:2014/18/0
So, it seems like the software revision on the battery is updated as part of the patch/service bulletin application.
(Software revision went from 29th week of 2013 to 18th week of 2014.)

I would feel pretty confident if you have those exact software revision numbers to conclude that you do not or do have the service bulletin applied.
If there are other software revision numbers out in the field, we'd need to start gathering the unique ones to see if we could figure out any differences or break points among them.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,517 Posts
Yep, I was told that my cabriolet already had the update. Battery test diagnosis shows the same date code as the new one for the coupe, so it obviously has had it done.

Len
2014 EV Coupe 18,500 miles
2014 EV Cabriolet 13,000 miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
Mine reports this:

Battery Production [Y/M/D]: 2014/9/16
Battery-FAT date [Y/M/D]: 2014/9/16
Rev.[Y/WK/PL] HW:2014/7/0, SW:2014/18/0

but my battery production date is newer than the supposed software update. And isn't this update supposed to be dated June of 2016?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,517 Posts
The service campaign letter was dated June, 2016, but my car just had it done and you can see from Jim's post above how it changed and shows a 2014 date. Maybe it took them two years to roll it out? Sure looks like your car has had the campaign done. If you've got a friend at Mercedes (doesn't even have to be a Smart dealership), they can look it up for you. I bet if you even call the dealership I went to in Cary, they will tell you if you have anything outstanding. Sure doesn't look like it though.

I bought my coupe in July, 2015 and it had not had the campaign done. I bought my cabriolet in May, 2017 and it had had the campaign done. So my experience kind of confirms the 2016 time frame of the letter.

Len
2014 EV Coupe 18,500 miles
2014 EV Cabriolet 13,000 miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
The service campaign letter was dated June, 2016, but my car just had it done and you can see from Jim's post above how it changed and shows a 2014 date. Maybe it took them two years to roll it out? Sure looks like your car has had the campaign done. If you've got a friend at Mercedes (doesn't even have to be a Smart dealership), they can look it up for you. I bet if you even call the dealership I went to in Cary, they will tell you if you have anything outstanding. Sure doesn't look like it though.
Yes, I know it was done during a 2016 repair/servicing. But the battery mfg date is newer than the 2014/18/0 software date - so one would think that it would not need it if that version was the only update.

The 2016 update may be a patched version 2014/18/0 that is not reflected in the version number unless the previous version was older than 2014/18/0. Kind of like windows updates. In other words, all patched versions will have "2014/18/0" in the report, but unpatched version may report "2014/18/0" too (I.e. a implies b does not mean that b implies a).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
148 Posts
That's a fair point. I seem to recall that the SB notice said something in hard to parse German->English translation that some cars may have been built with outdated software, with a slightly ambiguous statement as to whether the reported SW version could still be the later software version.

Do you happen to have data on whether the SW version changed on your car after the 2016 servicing?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,517 Posts
One more point to note about my car. Prior to delivering a car to a customer all recalls and service campaigns are supposed to be performed. On my coupe delivered in August, 2015, there was only one open recall/campaign and that was for the steering bolt. That was done before I got it. I got a copy of the VMI for the car when I bought it, so I know that the battery service campaign was not listed at that time.

Len
2014 EV Coupe 18,500 miles
2014 EV Cabriolet 13,000 miles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Jim,

See my earlier post. I only scanned it after the update, so yes, it might have originally been delivered with the old version - older than the 2014/9/16 mfg. date.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #35
Bumping this thread for an update:

Looking though the bulletins in my AllDataDIY subscription for the ED, I ran into this memo - it does seem to back up my hypothesis that:

1. The ED does automatically turn on an charge the 12V battery at some kind of regular interval (i.e. "in determined periods" in their Germenglish) - but only if the ED has the BMS software update.

2. The failure of 12V battery power causes failure of the HV battery over a (still unknown) period of time.

----------------------------------------------

Date: July 8, 2014
Order No.: SM-B-54.10/10
Group: 54

SUBJECT: MY-All, Models 451.491/.391/.490/.390
Battery Care for HV Batteries in After-Sales

Continuous care of the HV battery until vehicle handover to the customer is fundamentally important in ensuring that vehicles can be delivered fault-free and according to schedule, as well as to avoid consequential costs.

Non-compliance with the specifications can have various consequences:

^Hardware damage to the HV battery from deep discharging (consequential costs)
^HV power disable only possible manually
^Vehicle delivery to customer is delayed or customer withdraws from purchase contract due to missed deadline
In the case of expected vehicle idle times longer than 6 weeks, the high-voltage battery module must be checked and if necessary charged at least every 6 weeks!

Checking the charge level (State of Charge - SOC) of the high-voltage battery in After-Sales:

^If the SOC is lower than 50%, the high-voltage battery must be recharged to a SOC higher than 50%

^For hybrid vehicles please consider the WIS document AR54.10-P-1170xx: and SOC range between 55% and 65% is recommended.
^For Plug-in-Hybrids and Electric vehicles please consider the charging indications in the Owner's Manual: SOC equal to 100% is recommended
^If smart electric vehicle are going to be stocked longer than 90 or 270 days respectively, do so in accordance to WIS documents AR00.20-P-0001MCC and AR00.20-P-0002MCC, with the exception of the step to disconnect the 12V battery(see note below).

IMPORTANT NOTE : Do not disconnect the 12V battery in case of longer stocking periods of high-voltage vehicles (vehicle with a high-voltage battery). The 12V power supply is strictly necessary to guarantee the balancing of the cells of the HV battery. Otherwise damage of the HV battery may result. In all current models series the 12V battery is charged / backed up by the HV battery in determined periods.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Thank you this info has been bookmarked. I wonder if the 12 volt ps bal act requirement is also true with 453 models. I havn't read about any 453's bricking. I bought mine used w/ 200 miles on it. However, both the HV pack and the 12v in it are brand new, leads me to think it sat for too long on a lot somewhere.
 

·
Premium Member
MY08 cabrio MY09 cabrio Brabus MY15 ED
Joined
·
7,725 Posts
I wonder if the 12 volt ps bal act requirement is also true with 453 models. I havn't read about any 453's bricking. I bought mine used w/ 200 miles on it. However, both the HV pack and the 12v in it are brand new, leads me to think it sat for too long on a lot somewhere.
I do not believe that this early 451.0 ED BMS "feature" carried over to the 453.0 ED as it "should" have been built using 451.2 basis plus any improvements to the 453.0 but what do I know?

Yes, a 453 w/200 miles may have seen some lot time with unknown HV charging cycles - that combined with whatever high/low ambient temperatures that may have been encountered. The good news, you have a warranty to fall back on. As for a 453 bricking, believe there may have been only one that I can recall???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,181 Posts
Discussion Starter #38
Thank you this info has been bookmarked. I wonder if the 12 volt ps bal act requirement is also true with 453 models. I havn't read about any 453's bricking. I bought mine used w/ 200 miles on it. However, both the HV pack and the 12v in it are brand new, leads me to think it sat for too long on a lot somewhere.
The above information applies only to the 451. And I am increasingly thinking that the BMS bug was the cause of the dying 12V batteries, then the HV battery, during storage. The need for balancing when the car is sitting parked is confusing. Cell balancing should normally only be needed at the final couple AH of charging. Balancing at any other time is just self-discharging the battery pack. Sometimes I wonder if MB was putting their trust in engineers who were building their first EV thinking that they didn't need to do any research beforehand
 
21 - 38 of 38 Posts
Top