I also think tab-less design means less heat generated and overall less chance of a short, but with high nickel cells they do need a good way of preventing thermal runaway.
It doesn't really matter, if a single cell fails the pack is bad and has to be replaced.
Yeah, but in terms of fault current/ energy, they are a bit different. With 31p, one shorted cell can pull from 30/31 cells or 1/31 if isolated. For a 4680, it can pull from 8/9 the cells and is 1/9 if isolated. For equivilent Ah groups, that is 3.5x the per cell energy during a fault (theoretically 5 or 6x once the cell is optimized).
Indeed, though the orthogonal arrangement does lend itself to internal ribs potentially creating a torsion box/ table style structural pack (at a slight loss of density).Here’s the CATL announcement from their website.
CATL launches CTP 3.0 battery “Qilin,” achieves the highest integration level in the world
On June 23, CATL launched Qilin, the third generation of its CTP (cell-to-pack) technology. With a record-breaking volume utilization efficiency of 72% and an energy density of up to 255 Wh/kg, it achieves the highest integration level worldwide so far, capable of delivering a range of over...www.catl.com
Like @mongo said above, this is mostly a marketing press release and it doesn’t really give any substantial technical information to go off of.
The claimed specs and 4680 comparisons do not have enough contextual information provided to meaningfully understand what CATL is claiming. In addition to what @mongo said, other critical omissions include discussion of cost, manufacturability, longevity, charging curves. Cost is key. A great battery cell is worthless if it’s too expensive to be competitive in the market.
The usual differences and trade offs between cylindrical and prismatic cells still apply.
This design probably does have the slightly higher packing efficiency (72% vs 63% for 4680 according to CATL) than the 4680 structural pack because packing rectangular boxes together is more space-efficient than packing cylinders. Space is not the limiting factor in modern EVs except for 1) trying to make long range vehicles with lithium iron phosphate (LFP) cells and 2) trying to make ultra long range vehicles with lithium nickel cells. This is why Tesla uses prismatic cells from CATL for the standard range vehicles made in Shanghai using LFP chemistry.
We also can definitively say that the Qilin pack design is not fully a “structural” pack. The announcement says the cells can help support loads perpendicular to the driving direction (i.e. left-right loads) but the design is obviously not compatible with supporting longitudinal or torsional loads, so that’s a significant difference from the 4680 structural pack design. As we saw in the recent Munro tear down, the structural pack is about more than just the battery pack itself. When combined with the gigacasting for the rest of the underbody, the 4680 pack allows for a revolution in efficiency and personnel safety in General Assembly because most or maybe even all of the interior can be conveniently installed while standing up in a comfortable position with direct eyesight on the action being performed and generally only pushing motions which are faster and more ergonomic. Also this architecture should allow for more people working together at each station in General Assembly because they have more access to the hardware. As far as I can tell, the CATL Qilin pack will certainly not have these advantages because it won’t allow for deletion of the load pan the traditionally performs structural functions in the part of the chassis underneath the cabin.
If this is true then actual tear downs and public testing of the cells can be performed next year. This press release doesn’t have nearly enough information to really judge the Qilin cells on any basis other than CATL’s credibility. When they deliver the hardware we can really find out.
Yeah. I also just added an edit to the post after rereading the sentence. It’s not quite clear if CATL is saying that the cells are supporting much load for the chassis at all, because the only claimed benefit is “enhancing the shock and vibration resistance of the battery pack.”
Slightly skeptical of this new description of the V4 Superchargers: Tesla V4 Supercharger design and dimensions
Dimensions seem plausible (slightly taller and narrower, but thicker):
But here's how they describe a photo of the V4 they said they couldn't publish:
Sounds like a recipe for confusion if they make the V4 and the Megachargers visually similar.
Yeah, I once made the mistake of pulling into a semi-trailer diesel station, and it was freaking obvious that it wasn't meant for me
Sure they could, but why do all that processing when they could use the generated electricity directly to melt the aluminum? More efficient than Sabatier.
Was that before or after a truck driver offered some helpful advice in straight-forward language?Yeah, I once made the mistake of pulling into a semi-trailer diesel station, and it was freaking obvious that it wasn't meant for me
I'm glad to see this posted here.
I concider not getting stuck and improved ability to move out of the way of other vehicles (or the direction I want) a safety issue. You're stopped on an icy road at a red light that is now green, the car a ways behind you never stopped. Sure, if they hit you it's their fault, but is that sufficient consolation?
The number of contactors should not be based on the number of module groups. 4 contactors implies two switched HV feeds (each taking two from positive and negative) which may indicate independent feeds for front and rear drive units. This would be a durability improvement over the current single HV feed which results in no motor function if either drive unit has an HV fault.Update on the 4680 pack from Munro. They say the pack is so structurally sound, they're having a tough time carefully dismantling it, so no full video until next week at the earliest:
One interesting detail is the confirmation of 4 contactors that would connect underneath what I've heard Munro Live call the "penthouse" of the pack before. This might confirm that the arrangement is similar to the cutaway we saw at the Giga Austin Rodeo, with 4 banks of cells inside the pack:
