JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Center screen is setup to articulate, seems to only be missing the motors.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Pinned by The Limiting Factor
The Limiting Factor
9 hours ago (edited)
Additional Note/Correction on Manganese and LFP!
1) I may have been incorrect about the ability of Manganese to dope LFP and increase energy density. I thought I saw this at one point, but I'm struggling to find that information again.
2) I can't find a chemistry that's primarily LFP chemistry with Manganese added. However...
3) There is an up and coming chemistry called LMFP which appears to be 80% Manganese Phosphate with an Iron Phosphate and Carbon shell....
4) LMFP has a voltage 20% higher than LFP and it appears that most of the rest of the characteristics similar (cycle life, power density, capacity, etc)
5) Elon said "manganese is an alternative to iron & phosphorus"...
6) So did he mean an alternative to both iron and phosphorus (in which case LMNO which is an oxide), or an alternative to Iron Phosphate (in which case LMFP, which is mostly manganese phosphate). Eliminating Phosphorus is relevant because it poses a host of environmental concerns (but there are companies working to develop greener processes).
7) The plot thickens! I need to do more research on this. I've just scratched the surface, but it's pretty exciting.
Not in the windings... But yes the 3/Y rotor has skew in the magnets.2) then is there skew in the windings of the others ?
Thanks, interesting to hear the 3/Y are skewed. Yes, either way works as is obvious you know.Not in the windings... But yes the 3/Y rotor has skew in the magnets.
It could be related to the new multi-part laminate design and carbon fiber wrapping. So the same software might not work on the less expensive traditional rotor.Thanks, interesting to hear the 3/Y are skewed. Yes, either way works as is obvious you know.
So ........ supplementary question. Given that they have obviously cracked it in the S Plaid to have non-skewed by using clever software, and thereby achieving higher torque, can you see any reason why they don't just load that software into the Y and the 3 and get an equivalent performance improvement. And of course move to non-skewed which makes for cheaper manufacturer in the 3/Y ?
Not really imho. Separate issues.It could be related to the new multi-part laminate design and carbon fiber wrapping. So the same software might not work on the less expensive traditional rotor.
No, the carbon fiber wrap holds the small laminate pieces in, which isn't necessary with a one piece laminate. So the wrap isn't just for high RPM. It also reduces the necessary clearance which could be related.Not really imho. Separate issues.
The carbon sleeving is for very high rpm without airgap reduction. So in principle one could have the fast acceleration (or decelleration) from the high torque (i.e. non-skewed, which has a higher peak torque than skewed) without needing to go to high rpm (high max speed) that in turn rquires the wrapping. (btw sleeving is an old trick, not new).
The tweaked laminate comment you are making (presumably the T 'pole' laminations) aren't actually very different than ones I've used in the past so I am struggling to see what is new about them.
There's a lot that Sandy hasn't seen before. Doesn't mean it hasn't been done before even going back into the dim distant past with ferrites long before neos came in.@petit_bateau So you have used multi-part laminates on motors you have designed? (Where there are small pieces on the outside with nothing to firmly attach them to the rest of the rotor.) Because Sandy Munro says he has never seen anyone do that before.
I watched this hoping for clarification on Plaid vs LR differences and where the extra plaid power comes from. The carbon sleeving is great but he never said that is what gives extra power just that it is for very high rpm. Seems like same inverter, same battery pack. The whys were missing in this. This is ok if his target audience was a bunch of engineers that could make the non stated conclusions. I doubt that this is the bulk of his YouTube viewers.I had a chance to view the latest Munro stripdown video of the Model S Plaid motor/inverter today.
It was interesting and well worth watching although I disagree with Sandy on a few things (not for the first time) there was something he called out that also struck me as odd, i.e. this is not a skewed winding (see the 15:05 point). Now it has been several years since I last did a PMG/PMM but back in the day I worked with both skewed and unskewed. Ordinarily in a PMG (or M) one skews to reduce cogging and ripple, but this is not skewed. Sandy mentions that in driving the S it feels smooth, and presumably is also audibly quiet (human ears are pretty good at picking up harmonics, and I've heard no complaints), and so they must be managing this some other way.
Q1. How are they managing it ? (presumably with a more complex inverter waveform management ?)
Q2. Given that the inverter is common to the 3, the Y, the S, and the Plaid S, (and ?? presumably the X, and in due course the Semi and the CT and the Roadster 2) then is there skew in the windings of the others ?
By the way : The Tesla parts bin is going to be a core foundation for a lot of other industries and sectors .........
Plus being non-skewed means that more of the magnetism gets turned into torque, so both greater acceleration and higher top speed. (with software doing the smoothing)A second rear motor is probably most of it. Higher RPM motors and different gearing allow for higher top speed as well.
The communication lines are differential so low emission. Power return is usually via the chassis, so no opportunity to leverage capacitance there.Thanks for this link, cool thread.
About this cable thing. Not only this is idea for the robots in removing repetitive motions in Manufacturing, but this has a hidden use case maybe (haven't read the patent filing).
Forgive any ignorance, but what if those layers were stacked like a capacitor, about 100 layers, and each carried a signal. Noisy unless you isolated with alternating ground layers and had everything between films. A connection is made by designing the film with wider passage holes like they do with vias on a PCB, so you can't really "strip" this wire, it's predesigned for a specific build. Takes ribbon cable to a whole new dimension. Each layer a predetermined gauge to get fancy with power and signal combined. (OK, maybe I'll smoke some more, I think it's working and I like guessing what it is...)
View attachment 775332
Every phone since decades has similar camera-chips & a dedicated IR-Filter in Software. Some Apps allow you to circumvent the IR-Filter & you can "see" IR-Sources bright (TV-Remotes, modern "face-recognition"-stuff, etc.). A significant step of that "image processing" that is dropped is exactly to drop the IR-Range and do white-balance and many other things.
Karpathy talked about this in some presentation, but i am unable to find it with a quick google. I am not saying that it is FLIR-Level detail. But it is there & can be seen.
I tinkered with that stuff in my free time a lot (The wii-remotes have a small IR-Camera in them & you can do fun stuff if you setup some LEDs around your monitor ). Thats why i know that off-the-mill-cameras CAN see IR - it was a common "hack" to see if your IR-LEDs actually emit light.. because .. you can't see it
But we can agree to disagree. This is fine.