Total energy consumption reported by driveHistory seems underestimated
Opened this issue · 0 comments
Describe the bug
Total energy consumption reported by driveHistory seems underestimated.
I suggest we redefine the total energy consumed as total + regen
.
Useful info(please complete the following information):
- macOS
- Bluelinky Version 8.2.1
- Region: EU
- Brand: Hyundai (Ioniq 6)
Additional context
A few days ago I have made a trip of 458 km on a single charge, with lots of highway, going from 100% battery to 6%.
A call to vehicle.driveHistory()
leads to the following entry in the history[]
array:
{
"period": 0,
"rawDate": "20240511",
"date": "2024-05-10T22:00:00.000Z",
"consumption": {
"total": 64222,
"engine": 60423,
"climate": 2029,
"devices": 1770,
"battery": 0
},
"regen": 7284,
"distance": 458
},
The numbers seem odd. The total battery capacity is 77kWh, I have consumed 94% of it according to the infotainment (~72.4kWh) and according to the API it seems that only 64.222kWh would have been extracted from the battery.
The kWh/100 consumption calculated by (total / 1000) / (distance / 100)
leads to 14 kWh for 100 km, which is quite low.
I wonder how we should treat the regen
value. What if the actual total consumption was total + regen
? It would match the total energy consumed, as 64.2 + 7.3 = 71.5
is pretty close to the 72.4 estimated above. Consumption per km would become 15.6 which seems much closer to the reality too.
Another day, I did the same travel in the opposite direction, but there were lots of traffic jams and I have done a small charge in the middle of the trip. Drive history gives this
{
"period": 0,
"rawDate": "20240508",
"date": "2024-05-07T22:00:00.000Z",
"consumption": {
"total": 51299,
"engine": 47909,
"climate": 1080,
"devices": 2310,
"battery": 0
},
"regen": 20429,
"distance": 474
},
Notice the regen is quite high, which is consistent with circulation in traffic jams. total
is really low at 51.3 kWh, but total + regen
is close to the value of the other trip at 71.7 kWh. total / distance
gives 10.8 kWh / 100 km
(too low) but (total + regen) / distance
gives 15.1 kWh / 100 km
(quite realistic).