SAE Releases Charging Standard For Big Rigs / Trucks

MAY 17 2018 BY MARK KANE 114

Officially, official, we have a new charging standard… SAE J3068 for medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles charging in North America.

Mercedes-Benz Citaro Electric bus prototype in Europe with Type 2 charging inlet

SAE International just released specs for the SAE J3068 (the access costs $78), which is similar to the European IEC 62196 (aka Type 2 or CCS Combo). That because in fact it’s the European charging derivative adopted by SAE for bigger EVs.

The reason behind SAE J3068 is that SAE J1772 or its combo version (SAE J1772 Combo) doesn’t support three-phase charging, and single-phase charging was limited to 19.2 kW. Many commercial and industrial locations in the U.S. and Canada are equipped with three-phase power and the SAE J3068 enables the use of three-phase 480 V (up to 133 kW at 160A), as well as 600 V AC (up to 166 kW at 160A).

Read Also – Heliox Launches Europe’s Largest Opportunity & Depot Charging For Buses

With the DC part, it could of course offer 350 kW of power just like the European CCS we believe, but the official press release doesn’t contain general specs, so we base this assumption on the presentations:

In our opinion, the biggest mistake that was ever made by the SAE several years ago was that J1772 was created as only single-phase, plus later DC extension. The right way was to copy the standard from (or develop with) the European IEC using the Type 2 because it’s the only solution that is universal for all the applications (single-phase, three-phase and DC charging) and could be a general standard for all vehicles around the world.

Because of that mistake, the U.S. will not be able to enjoy a single standard for all kind of EVs (in Europe the plug/chargers are the same for cars and for trucks/buses) as well as there will be ongoing problem with import used cars between some markets.

SAE J3068 for medium and heavy duty electric vehicles charging

Press blast:

SAE International Releases New Specification (SAE J3068) for Charging of Medium and Heavy Duty Electric Vehicles

SAE International’s recommended practice for plug-in charging of heavy duty EVs has been approved and published.

Veefil-RT DC 50kW fast charger and Proterra electric bus

“J3068: Electric Vehicle Power Transfer System Using a Three-Phase Capable Coupler” was developed from existing international standards, which were extended to cover higher North American grid voltages and higher power levels. J3068 allows vehicles to fully utilize three-phase AC power where it is available and preferred, such as at commercial and industrial locations.

J3068 was developed in a consensus process by SAE International’s Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle Conductive Charging Task Force Committee, which today is comprised of over 100 global experts from the automotive industry, utilities, charging equipment manufacturers, national laboratories, and academia.

“This new standard was designed to offer a single vehicle charging coupler solution for three-phase and single-phase AC and DC charging for a class of vehicles,” according to Rodney McGee, Chief Engineer of EV Projects, University of Delaware, and SAE Medium and Heavy Duty Vehicle Conductive Charging Task Force Chair. “We wanted to combine this new approach for AC charging with 1000V DC charging based on existing SAE communication standards.”

“The goals of J3068 include bringing a proven, mass produced three-phase charging coupler to North America, and establishing a low-cost, reliable communication and control protocol for AC with inherently high interoperability” said Jim McLaughlin, document sponsor and retired Mack Trucks electrical engineer. “High power AC charging has cost advantages in many use cases, and three-phase charging simplifies balancing of the power grid.”

For more information about “J3068: Electric Vehicle Power Transfer System Using a Three-Phase Capable Coupler,” or to purchase the standard, visit

The SAE J1772 doesn’t support three-phase:

SAE J3068 for medium and heavy duty electric vehicles charging

source: SAE

Categories: Charging, Trucks

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

114 Comments on "SAE Releases Charging Standard For Big Rigs / Trucks"

newest oldest most voted

The market is still in its relative infancy why not migrate all vehicles to SAE J3068 and obsolete J1772?

And obsolete every EV sold in the last decade? Let SAE bear the cost of adapters to compensate for their typical American arrogance in assuming that they are right and everyone else is wrong.

American cars will never drive on European roads and likely will never be impacted by the difference in standards. We also don’t have 3 phase power in North America outside of industrial settings. It’s not even relevant to our needs. Secondly, it’s just a plug. The actual charger inside the car can likely handle both types just as most power electronics do. Your own European wall plugs differ by country and doesn’t impact your ability to plug in if you move. I know – because I travel between the US and Europe multiple times a year and my electronics don’t even blink.

American car companies like Tesla are also quite eager to localize in places like China based on whatever the local GB/T standards there are. That’s the way it should be. The product fits the country, not the other way around. It’s only Europeans steeped in EU bull$hit who seem to think that whatever they need is universal and feel the need to unleash a standard on the world for everything.

3 phase isn’t common in home and some commercial locations yes, but it is not just limited to industrial locations. many business and commercial locations (especially hotels and shopping malls) have and do get 3 phase power.

still, unless the chargers supports 3 phase 480/277, i think you’re better off wiring the car for single phase, as you would need a 3x20A 3 phase charger just to match the single phase 32A power off of a 208/120 circuit. The story would be different if we were talking about 415/240.

Also a lot of condos, high rises, high density living areas, etc. do use 3 ph 208/120V. Not sure if 3068 would help here, but something to consider.

Makes me wish we could have gone to 415/240V in the us, but standards and our infrastructure being build out precluded that…

Our last 2 U.S. condominium apartment complexes have been powered by 3-phase electricity, but the main panel in each apartment had only 2 of the phases, each 120 V to ground and 208 V between phases. Shared EVSE’s at each complex could have been powered by 3-phase power, but no U.S. EV would have been able to take advantage of the faster charging speed due to the shortsighted adoption of J1772, just one more bad U.S. decision following the choice of 240/120 V split phase instead of 400/230 V 3-phase residential power.

Bad decision? Every US utility would disagree with you. US rates are usually lower than European rates. The US system only requires one insulated medium voltage wire per subdivision, and therefore only one set of reclosers, one set of overcurrent protection, one power factor correction capacitor, and only one set of lightning arresters. Not Triple the amount of infrastructure. Seeing as it has been in use for well over one hundred years, your statement is unbelievably arrogant for the above reasons, and the fact that you think you know more than generations of utilities successfully providing power. As a matter of fact, the tendency is toward more single phase usage in the smaller sizes, not less. Also, just because Wikipedia incorrectly calls the 3 wire system “Split – Phase”, nothing could be further from the truth. One leg is in Exact Time Synchronism with the other leg since the juice only comes from one transformer can. Phase implies a Change or separation in time which has nothing whatsoever to do this system. The fact that Americans talk about Split-Phase starting methods has nothing to do with the fact that the motor in question may or may not be running from… Read more »

This has nothing to do with Europe except for the fact that Europe exclusively uses a plug and protocol identical to SAE J3068. In the US SAE J3068 and SAE J1772 will exist in the side by side. Using the same protocol but physically different plugs. That doesn’t make much sense. All it will lead to is that cars and trucks end up in front of a charger they could theoretically use but the plug doesn’t fit.

Do cars and trucks fill up at the same gas stations anywhere in the US? They don’t even use the same fuel.

what is the rational behind not being able to use the same plug. What are the benefits of a medium duty truck not being able to use a car charging outlet when parked on the side of the road?

This J3068 std represents what is needed today/tomorrow for EV CARs, and it’s very closed to latest European Combo std extended to cope with Porsche 350kW HPC350 requirements, so it should just be a long term replacement for SAE J1771/2, also usable for small trucks or backup for larger Trucks, means essentially for their Home/ WorkPlace/ Destination chargers where they can stay charging for more than 3 or 4 hours.
And now it’s that closed to the European Combo specs, it should have been made the SAME so we have a unique std moving forwards across the US and Europe allies.
But this will not be what will be needed for real Electric Trucks to SuperCharge in <1h “on the road” anywhere in the world. There they will need Tesla MegaChargers that are not covered here unfortunatly and should provide +/- 4x350kW # 1400kW combined, required to fast charge in <1h a Tesla 500M 800 kWh to 1000 kWh battery.

They often do fill up at the same stations, yes.

Gas, Diesel, and CNG…

Actually big rig diesel pumps have a different size nozzle than car diesel pumps. It can be hard to fill a car at a big rig pump depending on the car. The big rig pumps are larger and pump faster.

On the road Tesla MegaCharger Plugs will be required to Supercharge the 500 Miles Trucks in 100 kWh battery, as a replacement for J1772 not so good std. As it maps up to Porsche HPC 350 std with 350 kW / 7800 Volts. Strange its not introduced that way.

small correction – the plugs are the same but the protocol are different. however 3068 vehicles should be able to communicate and use 1772 / type 2 plugs and language (and charge 1p or 3p), assuming the vehicle is setup to do so (and i can’t see any reason why not as it would be a good fallback to have). think of this like thunderbolt 3 and usb-c. the plugs are the same but the protocols are different.

if (hypothetically) we moved to a type 2 plug i would continue to wire most ev stations single phase and have the underlying car chargers be single phase as well. (a lot of cars max out a 32A anyways so the benefit of 3-phase in the US would be limited). the type 2 stations could be european style where people bring their own cables so type 1 cars can be continue to be used.

full 3068 support is probably not likely, but it would be cool to harmonize on the plug at least.

Automakers in North America have already stated they don’t want the Mennekes thing, (and this at long last is essentially that), since it would be too many unused pins that they don’t want to pay for.

They actually don’t have to wire the pins if they don’t use 3 phase. In fact it may be possible to not even have any metal and wires for/in the plugs for the 2nd and 3rd phases (the bottom row) if not used (which what looks like may be the case based on some pictures I saw of some type 2 cars in Europe that don’t have high A/C charging).

But then that may complain about the extra plastic…

You’re bang on. I drive a Golf GTE and it only has contacts in the pins that it actually uses. Which makes me dream about fitting the other contacts and a 3p charger and suddenly being able to charge three times as quickly… I hope the tuner community discovers EVs soon.

That is true for light duty. Medium and heavy duty is another matter. Some commercial applications might want both inlets if they need flexibility.

3-phase 32A 400V is 22kW.

In Europe all new Tesla’s are able to draw 24A (16.5 kW) from the standard Type2 plugs, and older ones can draw 11 or 22 kW depending on single or dual chargers installed.

Other cars like the Renault Zoe can actually draw 63A 400V 3-phase (43 kW) at public chargers, but most people install 16/32A (11/22 kW) at home. The new Leaf e-plus can also draw 22kW, and most single-phase cars can draw 7.2 kW from these chargers.

At Home for my Tesla Model X 100D I opted for Single Phase AC 7kW = 230V x 32 Amps, as more than enough for me. Half of that with 16 Amps 1 phase AC could have been enough for my 65km#40M daily local commutes that only consume # 15kW every day, while I can typically stay connected for 8h at night. But I could get 7kW for almost same cost so I picked it for headroom. 3-Phases would have allowed me to do 11kW in 16Amps or 22kW in 32Amps, but at a higher cabling cost (Tesla Wallbox can do them all today for same price, but I had to create the line in my home carpark in huge Paris building, so extra cost for 3ph here). For me 3-Phases is usefull for places outside the home and work location, and outside the motorways where Superchargers are required for long trips, say like in city center surface or underground carparks where you stay 30mn to very few hours, for small trips. Hierarchy of chargers.

I see many more Tesla AC “destination chargers” on the map than DC SuperChargers. I suspect that strong AC chargers at overnight locations will always be more important than DC fast chargers for most applications. DC gets more news coverage, but AC always does more charging. All are important for EVs to succeed of course.

Seeing as Tesla basically ignored the SAE with their standard, and their ‘destination chargers’ continue the practice, I wonder how many trucks will just charge with a standard twist-lock cord connector available anywhere, and dispense with a ‘Glorified Light Switch’ Wall box. When I was having extreme difficulty finding J1772 compatible wallboxes to reliably work with my j1772 compatible car, I longed for a simple plug on the end of my car to just reliably charge it far from home. After all, this “standard” only enables 3 phase ‘Glorified Light Switches’, the same as now with J1772. I wonder how many buyers will say – how much will you take off the price if you just put a simple plug on the end of the truck? After all – I don’t need a wall box to run any other large piece of equipment. It would be one thing if they ‘Got it right the first time’, but they’ve Bungled the J1772 introduction (along with others, so the standards makers are only somewhat mostly but not fully, to blame) – but I always thought this ‘standard’ was mostly an ego-trip for those concerned. EV makers can only hope that Gasoline stations… Read more »

To answer my own question, thankfully gasoline stations were developed during ‘low-tech’ times. Otherwise I’m sure there would be needless complication – but thankfully gas stations have to stay easy for the consumer due to the existing customer base of cars needing refueling.

Is that only the older Zoe that can draw 44 kW AC? I heard the newer Zoe is back down to 22kW at least for now.

correct. the older Zoe (still available) is able to handle 44kW, only.
The newer is up to 22kW, but better for lower charging, due to less losses during charging process.

I hate the idea of lugging around my own cable. What a pain to have to uncoil it from the trunk. So much more convenient to just use the cable and plug onsite.

The removable cord in Europe is referred to as “Case B” in the IEC 61851-1 standard (counterpart to J1772). Case B is not supported in J3068 nor in J1772, only “Case C” which has the cord permanently attached at the EVSE.

J3068 does not include removable cables.

In Europe 3 Phases AC is only used to get to up to 22 kW over 32 Amps, with a 11 kW / 16 A lower alternative. Makes sense as “fast-chargers” outside the home and work location, although some use that at Home and work place too.
For 50kW+, say Supercharger locations for long trips typically on the motorways or their near bye exits, it’s all DC charging.

Also 44kW AC on three Phase is available in EU, but with fixed cable on EVSE.

At least an adapter should be cheap then, when all the adapting needed is the physical pins…??

The dominant European protocol (61851-1 Annex A) is not identical to J3068, only the coupler mechanical dimensions are identical. The IEC 61851-1 Annex D control specification is 99.9% identical to J3068 controls but is not widely used yet. There is less of a need for digital control of AC charging as Europe has nearly uniform 400/230 VAC three-phase available, which can be safely controlled with analog PWM controls (identical to J1772). Of course there are useful features added by Annex D / J3068, so it may be adopted in some applications in Europe as well.

we have already Imports of US cars for fossil fuel, and Tesla MS, MX – US Car Imports here in Europe. This because the german market for EVs is still late compare to some areas in US. greetings from Germany, 🙂

it’s literally their job to define a standard. how is that arrogant? LOL

We have cars with the J1772-plug in Europe too. The Mitsubishi I, the first Leaf and the first Ampera/Volt (and probably more). They use a simple Type 2 to J1772 cable to charge on Type 2 chargers. It’s 200 bucks. Or you can convert a J1772 to J1772 cable for 100 bucks. No big deal.

No big deal if the car only has 1-phase charger onboard, that is true.
I drive a Leaf with 32A J1772 and use a J1772 -> Type 2 cable to be able to use public Type2 chargers.

But new cars with J1772 is going extinct these days, it’s a long time since the last new car release of a car with J1772 plug. But still, the transition is smooth since adapters are available for <$150.

Exactly. I mean yeah, it’ll suck for cars on J1772, but it’ll only hurt more as more cars are sold. EVs are basically a homeopathic proportion of the north American fleet right now, so now is the best time possible to switch. Otherwise you guys are going to be stuck with obsolete charging infrastructure AND imperial measurements 😉

Also basically all the cars sold now with J1772 plugs will be obsolete in five years anyway, so meh… And adapters should be easy and cheap since the standards are similar anyway.

This is the way forward. Not only because of the cars. The charging networks are now being build as well. The US is sort of at the point of no return.

actually that what europe kinda went through… started with j1772, then transitioned over to type 2. they made it work by having type 2 to type 1 cables and the charging stations not always being fixed (bring your own cable).

we do have the issue of ccs type 1 already being out there. that could be worked around by having ccs 1 and 2 at the same station (could have type1, type2, chademo all in one station; lots of european places have this with the a/c plug as the 3rd charger).

there also exists type 1 adapters for type 2 cars; that’s what actually tesla offers and includes for their cars in south korea (as for some reason they went to j1772/ccs1)

at this point the only way i can see this happening is if tesla switched to type 2 in america as they have the volume to drive such a change, but the chance of that happening is small, though i wish it would happen.

This same reasoning was suggested years ago to eliminate Chademo from the US, where there were a mere 5,000 or so Chademo here and very few stations. But it didn’t happen then, so I’m guessing it certainly won’t happen now.

J3068 is not aimed at light duty passenger cars. Three-phase charging in North America has more value in medium and heavy duty applications. Most of these may end up being in private depots, think of an urban transit bus facility for overnight parking.

Yes, please! Retrofitting existing cars may come at a cost, but since most of the recent ones (with decent DC charging capacity) were also designed for the european market anyway, there should already exist the proper socket-part for the car.

3 phase is irrelevant for most people in the US. The onboard chargers are not wired for 3 phase and it’s extremely rare for homes too. So for most consumer vehicles, all this port adds are unnecessary costs (for the extra pins and wiring).

Not seeing the advantage of adopting this for the consumer market.

It is very relevant for destination chargers, but I see your case if most american homes doesn’t have 3-phase power.

We are a bit more lucky in Europe I guess, any new home where I live gets a 43kW home intake (400V 63A 3-phase), each phase having 230V relative to grounding/neutral.

Destination chargers use the single phase north american ‘Tesla Standard’ in North America – Not the same as the Mennekes look-alike Tesla uses in Europe.

Essentially no American homes have 3 phase power. There was one home within 160 km of my home that did have 3 phase power to run a decades old elevator (these days, the elevator (or lift if you prefer) would have been arranged to work on single-phase) that did have a smallish 3 phase service but it has since been converted to an orphanage after the jeweler/builder of the house died.

Bill Gates, some of Al Gore’s, and Some of Musk’s homes no doubt have them merely since they draw more electricity than the serving utility will provide for, what do you call it? Domestic services.

But homes up to the Multi Million Dollar level still get by with single phase electrics.

Mixing and matching single phase for homes and 3 phase for destination EVSEs doesn’t work well either. The 3 phase onboard chargers will be lower current for the same power output and that limits its single phase power.

Most onboard chargers don’t max out the single phase J1772 spec anyways, especially for consumer vehicles.

There are no signs US homes are making any movement toward 3 phase either.

On the other hand, the situation with different DC standard does make sense to solve as there are no such concerns.

But that is not the case in North America, where residential electrical service for single family homes is almost always 240/120 VAC split phase. Only larger apartment buildings get 3 phase here. So JakeY is right, the J3068 3-phase connector is not for light duty vehicles in North America.

Then again, it is a free country. If you want to sell an electric snow blower with a three-phase charging inlet, you could try. It might lose money but it would be fun. 😉

Jamcl3 you are proving my point. If you call our 3 wire system ‘split-phase’ it shows you do not understand:

1). What the word PHASE means (a change in time, or the cadence resulting from that)

2). What split-phase terminology has meant in American Parlance for over the past 100 years. It specifically refers to the phase change resultant from the so-called “RESISTANCE” starting method – in this case a RESISTANCE causes leading current.

3). The rationale for why such a system was designed by Thomas Edison in the first place (the AC system is the same as the DC system for unity power factor loading).

I made my own electric dual stage CASE snowblower with a 3 hp single-phase motor – the 250% brakedown torque provides the performance of a 7 1/2 horsepower motor, and when we had a very WET snowfall earlier this year all the gasoline powered 7 hp snowblowers kept stalling and bucking, whereas mine, while on the verge of stalling, just plowed right through. Whereas decades ago the Utility may have preferred such a motor to be arranged for 3 phase service, today 5 hp loads are common place, or even more, as my hot tub has 3- 3hp motors and larger ones have 4 of them.

The fact that the motor actually operates as a polyphase motor is an irrelevancy to the serving utility.

I see an opportunity for Tesla here, to add this standard to the Model 3, or at least the Model Y, along with J1772!

Then, if you want to use a Truck Stop Charger, you can!

If you haven’t noticed, Tesla didn’t wait for this and has designed their own 1MW charger. Charging formats are a nightmare. Why can’t we all just get along?

Yea, what was wrong with the 25 pin parallel printer port, anyway? It was good enough for Grandpa! Who needs high speed USB? 😉

Didn’t they just bundle up 4 parallell chargers to achieve that?

Tesla uses a “Type 2” three phase charging coupler in Europe, which will mate with a J3068. But Tesla uses the same analog controls (PWM) as J1772 for AC charging, as does every Type 2 application in Europe. Tesla also uses the Type 2 for SuperCharging in Europe (without the big 8 mm pins that everyone else uses for DC) but with a different control protocol than either J1772 or J3068. Tesla DC charging is probably based on single wire CAN which was considered for J3068, but the new LIN transceivers offer the same analog voltage levels as J1772 on top of the digital signaling as a backup method to cut power, so J3068 went with LIN controls. North America cannot safely use only analog controls for three phase AC as J1772 does because there is no way to communicate voltage levels, and the very common 480/277 VAC would damage many EVs designed for 240 VAC.

Just switch to J3068. Cars that have a J1772 could just swap that. Even at todays expensive rates for such parts it is less then $200 for the inlet. If the car does not have a 3 phase charger only one phase needs to be connected. This is all that needs doing.

Soooo, very true!

I cannot see value in J3068 in light duty applications, unless a fleet had a need to charge from 277 VAC. J1772 cannot do that with analog controls without risk of equipment damage in most cases.

Since the picture in the article shows a type2 only connector on the Citaro bus, this is the real thing

Europeans will like this obviously, but the 347Y/600
standard is too small a market to make a special plug for. Even Tesla does *NOT* do this in Canada – all their facilitites transform 347 to 277 just after the switchgear. I wonder how many dozens of experts they had to have to come up with this. Seriously though they seemed to try harder to standardize things and knowing how comittees work, they could have done much worse.

The thing is you are not losing anything by using the J3068. It can still be used even if no 3-phase power is available. The footprint is slightly larger on the upper part but does this really matter?
Also I’m sure there is 3-Phase power on every industrial site in the US. How else are you running induction motors. Affordable VFDs are relatively new and a 50kW motor for a paper mill or whatever is certainly not run using a capacitor.
The plug also doesn’t need to be made. It is already being made and according to this document the official standard for medium- and heavy-duty electric vehicles charging in North America. You might as well just add cars to it.

Did you bother to read what I said? I’m only talking about the 347 volt compatibility. I’d have no issue with it as long as every TRUCK that worked on 347 also worked on 277. Its a pain for the Canadian truck owner to come over to the states and then find out there is no place to plug in.

Why wouldn’t it work. The voltage rating on AC is up to. Those are switch mode power supplies. They don’t care.

‘Switch Mode’ is much too BROAD a category. Most cars in the states have Dual Up-Converter technology where the converters swap turns every half cycle. The power to the car is not Pure DC, or I suppose, to be technically accurate it is Pure DC for half a cycle, and then the converter shuts off until the next odd half cycle. The other up converter provides ‘Pure DC’ for the next even half cycle, and then shuts down. The end effect is a car charger turning on and off 100, or in our case 120 times per second. ‘Switch Mode’ supplies suggest a pure dc filtered output with a high switching frequency. The frequency of switching in USA car chargers is also high, but any ‘smoothing capacitors’ are not used for smoothing the output, which long term (16.67 ms or longer) is pulsating direct current. The capacitors are merely for smoothing the inductive ‘fly-back’, a state-side slang from the old televisions. You may call it inductive ripple current if you prefer. This is done at the high frequency rate. No attempt is made to filter the ‘long term’ output since the battery being charged doesn’t care.

Why wouldn’t it work? Depends on how manufacturers design the equipment. As an example, the old Tesla Universal Mobile connectors ($1500) for the Roadster would ALARM at 205 volts, and shut down at 200. This is fine if you are living in a home with 230 volts nominal. But it won’t work if you are in an urban center or condominium where the nominal voltage is 200. Many of the public wall boxes in my area have a voltage while charging of around 185-197 volts. The $1500 adapter in this case simply didn’t work. Just get a 240 volt line so you say? Easier said than done – if you live in Brooklyn, or the western end of Queens, NY, you will never EVER see anything higher than 216. Boost transformers would easily solve the problem it is true, but most electricians never heard of them, or know how to wire them.

Bill, there are signals for maximum voltage and for minimum voltage. So there is no risk of equipment damage. But there is no reason a fleet operator needs to be concerned with supporting vehicles he does not own. So if someone wants to build a fleet of (for example) transit busses that charge at 600 VAC, they can use J3068 and not endanger other EVs that have a type 2 inlet but can only charge at 480 VAC and below.

By the way, J3068 specifies that an EVSE which has more than one AC supply connection can wait for the EV to signal its maximum working voltage and then the EVSE will choose the highest voltage the EV can use. This allows a single EVSE to supply (for example) 208/120 VAC and 480/277 VAC. In public charging locations, this could provide wider compatibility. Even a transit bus operator that buys multiple brands of EV buses might benefit from it. But it is an optional feature of course.

He might stop at places he does not own.

I agree everything should always work all the time, but there have been plenty of reasons why pulling up to an old j1772 cord, or a Tesla UMC, Aerovironment, GE Wattstation, etc has resulted in damage or disappointment. Then there is BLINK and PEP which almost never work.

Exactly. My town here in MA runs a Canadian eLion school bus and that has J1772 and CCS. It’s not even a truck vs car thing. There is no reason to rip out a well established standard that works for US, Canadian, Mexican local conditions really well.

Bill, I do not understand your point. The control protocol allows for up to 6000 volts with 0.1 V resolution, to allow for future expansion with other connectors. Are you suggesting we cut the voltage signal from 16 bits back to 12? (It might happen in edition 2 if the LIN definition file is reworked. 6000 V could be more than will ever be needed.) The Type 2 connector was designed to support ratings up to 600 VAC, which is used in rare cases even in parts of Europe. Once you establish voltage signaling, there is not much point in making the range artificially narrow. Unless you think we might run out of bits? 😉

You are apparently right – you don’t understand my point. We’ll see what transpires.

Totally agree that not going for three-phase was a dumb choice as almost all DCFC station is hook to heavy industrial or commercial three-phase supply.
Three-phase feed higher power with lower cost and lost, and if hook to a proper charger, no unbalanced load that could impair the station or even the grid.
I don’t know why we write three-phase instead of three-phases?

If you are using DCFC, there is no 3 phase. There is only positive and negative. The 3 phase only comes in for AC charging.

Djoni is saying that DCFCs need an industrial/commerical 3-phase AC supply anyway – it would be peanuts to also offer 3-phase AC charging at the same station – like we do everywhere in Europe.


Three phase supply are mostly the power source where they offer you single phase L2.
It would have been pretty clever to input most J1772 with three phase.

Beside the fact that L2 that are single phase hooked to a three phase supply and have lower voltage and because the charger is current limited by the J1772 protocol you end up charging at a slower speed than a single phase 240 volts.
Like 208/240 slower or 86.6% slower.
Three phase would have charge 150% faster at the same current @ 240 single phase or 1.73% faster with 208 volts single phase like some are around here.

Very dumb mistake not to make J1772 three phase ready.

Like your POTUS like to say it, “NO GOOD”

But I’m sure he don’t care about this topic.

Nope, not necessarily. The supposedly popular BOSCH DCFC 25 kw output wall-mounted fast charger can ONLY take a single phase input of 170-285 volts. Does not, and cannot use any 3 phase source, however it can be run from one leg of a 277 volt system (but CANNOT run from a 347 volt system without the electrician installing a BUCK transformer, just the same way all Canadian Supercharger Tesla installations have at a minimum autotransformer bucking units to provide the requisite 277Y/480 which is an odd-ball in Canada.

I was talking about J1772, but pulling 25 kw with a single phase set up when you have three phase available is not wise either.
Most appliance of that power, small potato by itself, I know, also offer either choice.
Where ever you have it you feed it with three phase, when not the you use the lesser choice of single phase.

You’re making generalizations. 3 of the BOSCH 25 kw single-phase wallboxes in a public area require no lossy transformer or autotransformer, and may be run DIRECTLY off 277Y/480 volt circuits DIRECTLY with no transformation losses outside of the wallbox fast charger itself. If all the chargers are running at capacity, the load on the electric service is completely balanced.

Why don’t you guys come up with a 3 phase light bulb since you are so worried about balance every single place and every single microsecond?

Because it’s short for three phase electric power.

3 phases can only exist with AC power. There are no phases in DC.

Copy that. I was answering Djoni’s last line 😉

So you short an “s” Great save!

(⌐■_■) Trollnonymous

“which is similar to the European IEC 62196 (aka Type 2 or CCS Combo). That because in fact it’s the European charging derivative adopted by SAE for bigger EVs.”


“480 V (up to 133 kW at 160A), as well as 600 V AC (up to 166 kW at 160A).”

Why does it sound like this will still not be compatible with anything? None of those new fancy EA 350Kw DCFC’s charge port will work with this plus it’s slower than the new DCFC’s being deployed that are said to be 350Kw.

Sure, let’s have yet another standard coming late from SAE.

Yeah this is a very late standard – and the only good thing you can say about it is that it is semi compatible (at least jack wise) with the Mennekes stuff. I would tend to think large truck makers would do much as anyone else, = very small charger on board and just use a dock located DCFC (what we used to call Level 3), at the home port. That way, on the road, they can use any somewhat standardized DCFC. But since they admit the level 2 stuff is a fall back, many will probably continue using it. As far as grid loading problems, the only place at all where it makes any difference is in residential areas, and that won’t be solved until utilities start charging demand for large residential users. Its a bit of a misnomer anyway. J1772 loads down 2 phases at any 190-210 volt location, and any 3 chargers will perfectly balance the grid. It is basically just trivial amounts of electricity anyway in the Commercial Sphere. Too bad they didn’t go back to L1, 2, and 3 since the public instantly accepted those demarcations and many people (including manufacturer’s brouchures) call fast charging… Read more »
Bill, apparently you should have joined the task force to help. You know we are not paid, right? It is all volunteers. And J3068 is technically a “Recommended Practice”, not a Standard. Even J1772 did not become a Standard until recently. As for being “late”, says who and why? There have been very few heavy EV applications until recently, and the market unit volume is tiny compared to passenger cars, which is why trucks tend to be 10 years behind cars in technology. Who do you think should pay to speed things up for a non-existent market? Not my manager at work… By the way, “Level 3” is not part of J1772. It is mentioned in an historical appendix but was never implemented in the market. It reminds me of the term “Combo” which does not appear in any standards documents that I can find, yet appears to used by marketing people to refer to the 8mm DC pins. By the way, J3068 does not use the terms “Level 1” or “Level 2” to refer to power, we just use watts. Level 1 appears to mean 120 VAC, Level 2 refers to 208 VAC and up. J3068 just refers to… Read more »
Well, ok, I admit I am not shy about criticizing problems. But that is due to problems I have with GREAT BRAINS telling me what to do. Item: I bought a Schneider Square – D 30 amp J1772 wall box when it was brand new (I was the first sale in the northeast USA). My distributor, QUERMBACK ELECTRIC chauked up the sale as a ‘FAIL’ since they figured if a professional had trouble where would that leave a housewife? Called engineering support and the engineer said (Peru, Indiana) that “It works with a Leaf and VOLT) (18 and 15 amperes respectively at the time) , so that’s all we care about!” and hanged up on me. Quermback called them up and read them the riot act. How dare they talk to one of their customers that way? So the guy called back with his tail between his legs, and said, what could he do to help me, and I said – I corrected the operation of the wallbox by ‘adjusting’ the ground fault trip point to work with the Tesla Roadster, and also got rid of the goofy Faston overheated connectors, and replaced them with box lugs so that the… Read more »

It is not a new standard, J3068 is fully harmonized with IEC 61851-1 edition 3 Annex D, which was published about a year earlier. Similarly, J1772 is fully harmonized with 61851-1 Annex A. Mechanical standards are separated in IEC, see 62196. SAE combines mechanical and electrical controls in one document. (There are advantages and disadvantages in any partitioning scheme.)

The goals of Annex D and J3068 differ in that light duty applications were more important in the European version, whereas the was no standard available at all in North America for heavy duty AC applications. And North America has multiple supply voltages where Europe is mostly uniform 400/230 VAC three phase.

Long term, the biggest value may be in demand/response applications, but edition 1 of J3068 does not get deeply into that. We just needed a low cost, reliable upgrade to PWM (analog J1772) controls so that we could use 480 VAC without risk of equipment damage. You are welcome. 😉

In our opinion, the biggest mistake that was ever made by the SAE several years ago was that J1772 was created as only single-phase, plus later DC extension.

On the plus side, we’re still (hopefully) early enough along that they could change. Also, it’s a crying shame that we haven’t adopted the L2 infrastructure that provides just a plug from Europe either.

Yeah, well Mark Kane supposedly hails from Europe, and there as here it is not understood, that the way J1772 is implemented at commercial locations loads down 2 of 3 phases – not just one, and that 3 docking stations perfectly balance the ‘grid’, and the main point is that small L2 chargers are such small potatoes in the Commercial Sphere that it just doesn’t matter.

Any place you see only 2 soup cans on the pole for a small commercial installation is to provide ‘Three-Phase’ for the establishment but it is a horribly unbalanced load on the grid. But since the utility obviously is unconcerned, and would much rather save the cost of 2 xformers rather than a full 3 – that should put an end to the discussion on that subject since THE UTILITIES THEMSELVES COULDN’T CARE LESS ABOUT THE TRIVIAL IMBALANCE.

Honestly I’m in Europe driving a Tesla Model X 100D. I have a mobile charger enabling 3x Phases 16 to 24 Amps 230 Volts and never ever used that. In theory it should make sense up to 32 Amps available for outside the home and work place charging, but in real very few people use that. Where you can stay connected for typically 8h, like Home and WokPlace car parks, 1 phase 230V/32A 7kW AC is more than enough as you only need to recharge there every night or day what you consumed for your local commutes in last 24h or 48h, which fo me is 15kWh/24h for 65km = 40M driven per day. So nothing terrible to have missed that in the US to be frank. This said as they come out with this up-to date J3068 std instead of presenting it for Trucks they should also advise it for cars with large >100kWh battery packs, as a replacement or an alternative for J1772, since it does all plus adds the extra last refinements of European CCS Combo plug up-dated for Porsche 350kW/800V requirements. Question is now are are almost aligned why not taking the exact same plug for… Read more »

Sorry Pat – it was actually Europeans who forced the development of ‘Type 2’ since there were SO many complaints that you couldn’t charge a Tesla Roadster faster than 15 or 16 amperes in most places. Britain which CLAIMS to follow the Euro standard, actually cheats a bit in ‘domestic areas’, and to do that they have to allow 32 ampere single phase loadings. But the Swiss don’t go for that. Therefore, to keep charging times reasonable (and to avoid having to rewire the homes) 3 phase charging systems for the “S” and “X” were developed that use a different charger, different car connector, and different ‘standard charging cord’.

So I find it a little more than interesting that the new Austrian manufactured – British Jag E-Pace has exactly the same built in charger as the single phase Bolt Ev.

And to repeat – American Car manufacturers have already stated they want nothing to do with anything Mennekes-esque.

Pat, you did not say where you are in Europe but in some places it is literally illegal to draw more than 20 amps single phase. For larger loads, three phase must be used. This seemed odd to me at first, but apparently it has to do with shared-core three-phase transformers, that get inefficient when unbalanced. Separate cores do not have this problem and have reliability advantages, but are more expensive and less common in certain parts of Europe. I assume it has something to do with limited funds after the great war, I don’t know.

The coupler is exactly the same, although certification testing is more strict in the US. The control protocol is different because we have higher voltages in the US, and lower also. Europe does not have multiple AC voltages in most places.

Re: “480 V (up to 133 kW at 160A), as well as 600 V AC (up to 166 kW at 160A).”
Is this really going to be enough kW for semi-truck charging? It does not seems so.

I had same point as you. For 800kWh up to 100KWh on 500 Miles Tesla Truck, this 350kW will not super charge fast enough on the road, and they will need MegaCharger speed expected # 4 x 350kW # 1400 kW combined, so hey can full charge in <1h.
This said, it could still be usefull for Truck Home and WorkPlace and Destination chargers and for using the EV Cars chargers on the road as backup. So fine as long as they don't forget to add Tesla Megacharger somewhere… or that will look like another outdated std on day 1….

Scott, J3068 is aimed at AC charging, imagine a three-phase version of J1772 for overnight use. It is not aimed at DC charging, although the existing 8 mm DC pins can be used exactly the same way they are used in Europe. J3068 refers to the relevant documents for DC 8 mm extensions and adds nothing. The only new part is a control protocol for AC charging that is almost as inexpensive as PWM (from J1772) but provides for hundreds of digital signals, not just the three analog signals (arguable) in PWM. It is based on industry standard LIN (Local Interconnect Network) communications, which most vehicles use for low speed applications (except GM).

There are lots of medium duty applications also, think of school buses and UPS delivery trucks.

By the way, the 160 amp number is for up to about 20 minutes without a cooled cable, just like Tesla SuperCharger ratings stickers. Heavy Duty applications may need to go much longer and we expect continuous ratings will max out at 120 amps or below without cooling. It depends on the manufacturers and UL. This is a “hot” area of work, pun intended.

J1772 passenger car infrastructure could be used when needed in the came way Tesla drivers do it, with an adapter. But remember trucks and buses don’t really fit into the parking spots for EVs and much as we wanna talk shared infrastructure Chevys Volts will not be charging next to Class 8 trucks very often. Generally these two don’t even occupy the same general area in parking lots.

J1772 has 3.6mm pins and we do 80A with advanced contacts. With 8mm contacts on the combo side around 200A. So, J3068 (IEC Type 2) has 6mm pins for AC, obviously you can expect some where between the 3.6mm and less than the 8mm. A good place to get an idea for what is possible for the 6mm pins is to look at Tesla superchargers in Europe.

Also remember, at these power levels integrated motor inverter/chargers become more efficient. Transpower, for example uses uses their traction motor inverter as a 70kW charger. So many of these OEMs are not carrying around an extra charger box.

That is fine as long as they are not sued for patent infringement. Yes, I agree the idea shouldn’t be patented either since it is so obvious. But hey I don’t write the laws.

And how does this support fast charging for Big rigs/buses? That needs at least 1 MW of power.

‘needs’ is a very relative term….

Any big vehicle would indeed get a lot of power from a 350kW plug also, and the ‘need’ for even faster charging may not apply to all big vehicles….

Knut, obviously you never drove a Long Range EV like aTesla…. as for the SAE folks who standardize things they don’t understand here. This new Std can work for future High end EVs (not in scope here) and for small trucks, plus for Large trucks as backup and for locations where they could stay plugged for >3h. But on the road/motorways for long trips, they will need to add MEGACHARGERS for trucks, like for new tesla 500M Truck that should have 800 kWh to 1000kWh battery pack, they will need Tesla modular MagaChargers plugs expected to deliver # 4x350kW or 1400 kW DC combined, so they can charge its up to 1000kWh=1mWh in <1h… on the road.

No, in this case ‘need’ isn’t a relative term. Having to wait > 45 minutes to charge your battery isn’t fast in any way, shape or form.

See SAE J3105 for fast charging buses. J3068 is aimed at AC charging, usually overnight.

This seems like ridiculously low power output for trucks. I was expecting up to 1MW at 800VDC.

Does the SAE get anything out of establishing a standard plug? Like license or royalty fees from companies that use it?

Volt#671 + BoltEV + Model 3

And what about new TESLA MEGACHARGER port ??? My understanding is it will be a lot more appropriate for trucks. Was outed as 4 x pairs of very thick DC-only connectors, allowing up to 4 x 350kW +/- means # 1400 kW combined. When you think that 500M Tesla truck will have between 800 kWh and 1000 kWh of battery capacity, charging it at (only) 350kW will just not be an option.
Once again there is NO VISION outside TESLA and in this SAE Org. Shame on them !
For me, to be a little more positive, this represents what is needed today for EV CARs and should just be a replacement for SAE J1771/2, also usable for small trucks or backup for larger ones.
This will not be what will be needed for real Electric Truck anywhere in the world.

And what about new TESLA MEGACHARGER port ? My understanding is it will be a lot more appropriate than this already outdated std for Trucks, at least “on the road”. It was outed as 4 x pairs of very thick DC-only connectors, allowing up to 4 x 350kW +/- means # 1400 kW combined. When you think that 500 Miles Tesla truck will have between 800 kWh and 1000 kWh of battery capacity, charging it at (only) 350 kW will just not be an option, as 3h to 4 h charging is not an option when “on the road”. Once again there seams to exist NO (complete) EV VISION outside TESLA and in this whole SAE Org. ! For me, to be a little more positive, this J3068 std represents what is needed today for EV CARs, very closed to latest European Combo std extended to cope with Porsche 350kW HPC350 requirements, so it should just be a long term replacement for SAE J1771/2, also usable for small trucks or backup for larger Trucks, but then only or for their Home/ WorkPlace/ Destination chargers where they can stay charging for more than 3 or 4 hours. This will not be… Read more »

Tesla is going to use whatever they fancy. No need to worry about them.

Yes but its not that they “Fancy”, whoever make a 500 Miles EV Truck with up to 1000kWh battery will need MegaWatt charging “ON THE ROAD” not everywhere, so they can charge it in <1h.

The average heavy duty truck in North America travels < 270 miles per day. Long haul trucks may need DC charging, but most trucks might not.

Nice to see SAR adopting CCS2 (Combo Type2 common in Europe) to N.America.

Suggest that SAE just go full in and adopt the Type2 connector for N.America across the board; both for AC and DC charging!

Note: in Europe, even Tesla uses the Type2 connector for its vehicle in supporting supercharging.

By going with the Type2 plug/connector it would leave the “plug wars” as history, creating a much better future of drivers.

This is another attempt to over complicate everything. The bottom line is
The bottom two ports on these plugs is for fast charge DC. So all they have to do is have all quick charge DC stations. All vehicles with the direct DC capability will be compatible. Only takes two wires no neet for our vehicles to convert the power from ac to dc to charge. Too simple I guess. They just want more waste and cost.