AeroVironment TurboDock For Workplace and Commercial EV Charging

2 years ago by Mark Kane 18

AeroVironment's New TurboDock Workplace and Commercial EV Charging Station Puts Control in the Palm of Drivers' Hands with Smartphone App

AeroVironment’s New TurboDock Workplace and Commercial EV Charging Station Puts Control in the Palm of Drivers’ Hands with Smartphone App

AeroVironment TurboDock

AeroVironment TurboDock

TurboDock is the latest charging station introduced by AeroVironment for workplace and commercial EV charging.

It’s compact, 16 A/240 V (over 3.8 kW) and controlled through a smartphone app.

Wahid Nawabi, senior vice president and general manager of AeroVironment’s Efficient Energy Systems business segment stated:

“TurboDock is the simple, quick and practical workplace charging system because it’s easy to install, easy to use, cost-effective and secure. The first-of-its-kind system puts Bluetooth-enabled smartphone access control of charging stations right at the fingertips of employers, landlords and property managers who need a better solution for meeting the charging demands of their EV-driving staff, tenants and patrons”

“Importantly, TurboDock costs less to own and maintain.”

To lower maintenance costs, AeroVironment implemented Bluetooth smartphone connectivity (instead of access card), which eliminates the need for a dedicated cellular service and according to the manufacturer saves “hundreds of dollars each year“.

“TurboDock can be configured easily to meet the specific needs and circumstances of each operator. For example, an administrator can give one universal access code to all of their EV-driving users, assign each user their own unique access code or choose open access for all users. TurboDock makes switching between open access and access control quick and simple.”

For further cost reduction of installation of charging stations in the parking lot, AeroVironment prepared a modular design.

“TurboDock comes in two models, a pedestal unit that accommodates one to four chargers per location and a wall adapter that can be configured with one or two chargers per location. This modular design makes it easy to expand the number of chargers as needed over time.”

The price is set at $1,299 (MSRP) for the TurboDock itself and $1,798 (MSRP) for the charging module and mounting plate or pedestal.

“Benefits of using TurboDock in the workplace include enhanced employee productivity and satisfaction. When configured for 12 amp or 16 amp charging, TurboDock provides twice as many chargers with the same electrical service required for a 30 amp charging. More chargers mean increased productivity since TurboDock alleviates the need for EV-driving employees to move their vehicles during the workday so someone else can use the charger.

For multi-unit dwelling owners, TurboDock represents a value-added amenity to attract and retain tenants. Commercial property managers will benefit from the longer “staying time” TurboDock will afford their EV-driving patrons who will likely stay/shop longer while their vehicles recharge.

With fewer parts subject to damage or wearing out, TurboDock significantly improves uptime. TurboDock also eliminates the costs associated with managing access cards or key fobs. Additionally, TurboDock is upgradeable, allowing the addition of future options and next-generation software through the smartphone app.

TurboDock costs $1,299 (MSRP) for the charging module only and $1,798 (MSRP) for the charging module and mounting plate or pedestal. For more information, visit TurboDock.com”

More information: TurboDock

Tags: , ,

18 responses to "AeroVironment TurboDock For Workplace and Commercial EV Charging"

  1. Yoyodyn says:

    Why Bluetooth and not NFC?

    1. reciprocity says:

      Because Bluetooth is nearly universal. NFC is not.

      NFC also can’t do what’s pictured (allow someone in the comfort of their car to control the station).

  2. Ocean Railroader says:

    I really wish they would build a parking meter type charger where you can put coins or dollar bills into it like a vending machine.

    1. martinwinlow says:

      Why? Are saying you would rather mess around with cash than just activate charging via a smart phone? And why would AV want to make a machine that works like that, with all it potential failure mechanisms, susceptibility to vandalism and fraud? And why would an operator want to buy them (for all the same reasons)? Puzzled of Herts, UK. MW

  3. Bill Howland says:

    I hope they got a decent commission for this AD. On my screen I have “Turbo COrds” all over the place, so now we’ll have a lot of “Turbo DOcs”. hehe.

    Here’s the apartment EVSE that Spider-dan has been waiting for, although if I was the apartment manager I’d do things in a cheaper way. BUt for people insisting on only store-bought solutions, I’d guess this is the way to go.

  4. Someone out there says:

    Why can’t they have the car identify itself when you plug it in?

    1. mustang_sallad says:

      The existing J1772 standard doesn’t support any kind of higher level communication like that. There are more advanced communications available in some of the more recent standards that would add power line communications on top of the J1772 pilot signal, but you’ll need EVs and EVSEs that support that, and right now, given how much people complain about the cost of EVSEs, I don’t see how anyone’s going to be able to justify the added cost of a PLC module.

      1. Someone out there says:

        Well then it’s a stupid standard to begin with. A simple microcontroller costs a few cents, it would not raise the price noticeably to add one.

        1. Sublime says:

          What we need is a 90th charging standard that incorporates this feature 🙂

          The reality is that in about 5 years there will be affordable 200 mile range EVs and we’ll wonder why so much effort was put into a 25mph charging infrastructure.

          1. Someone says:

            Well, if you have your car parked at your workplace for 8-10 hours every day you don’t need a very fast charger at that location.

          2. Spec9 says:

            This is the best standard we have out there though. It is the only one all modern USA EVs can use.

  5. Ted P says:

    Why not just have credit card readers? The equipment is low cost, proven and almost all drivers in the US have one or more credit cards.

    1. JRMW says:

      How many EV owners dont have a smartphone?
      I hate that our local parking meters require the use of a credit card instead of just using a smartphone app. Irritating standing outside in the cold waiting for it to finish the transaction!

      1. Ted P says:

        That could also work, provided there is good cellular network service available. There are some EVSEs where this is not always the case.

  6. martinwinlow says:

    I didn’t get what electrical connection it uses. If it isn’t Type 1 or 2 then it’s dead in the water.

    1. GSP says:

      It has a Type 1 (J1772) connector.

      GSP

  7. Sublime says:

    That is smart that they’ve taken the 3G cell communications out of the EVSE and just piggy back on the user’s smartphone. That communications HW was the cause, 9 times out of ten, for our workplace chargers to stop functioning. They finally hardwired them ethernet IIRC.

  8. Lou says:

    Sublime is right, 5 years from now, when 200 mile EV’s are typical, charging at work or at commercial locations might very well be irrelevant. What you might see, though, are apartment dwellers who do not have access to overnight charging plugging in at work and at the occasional commercial location. My sense, though, is that QC charging will be the norm for those people.

    In regards to the unit’s charging speed, too: at work, if an employer offers 240V charging and limits the amount of time a car can be charging, then the 6.6 (or faster)charging would be what drivers want. My employer is considering installing some Level II’s and then placing a 2 hour limit on cars being plugged in. I drive a Volt, and that would net me about 20 miles added range(so the speed is actually not that important to me). However, if I was driving a Leaf with the 6.6 on board, I’d get 40 miles, which is an appreciable improvement. I don’t know if there is any meaningful cost increase to go the faster route, if not then I’d want it.

    Lou

    Lou