Model S Accident/Fire

[Smop]

APNewsBreak: Tesla Car Fire Involved Battery - ABC News

APNewsBreak: Tesla Car Fire Involved Battery

SEATTLE October 3, 2013 (AP)
By MIKE BAKER and TOM KRISHER Associated Press

A fire that engulfed the front end of a Tesla electric car also burned in the vehicle's battery pack.
In documents obtained by The Associated Press under Washington state public records law, firefighters describe their struggle to extinguish the flames burning a Model S car near Seattle on Tuesday.
Firefighters say in an incident narrative that the car fire appeared to be extinguished but then reignited, leading them to dismantle the front end of the vehicle. They used a jack to lift the vehicle and a circular saw to gain access to the burning battery pack.
Shares of Tesla Motors Inc. fell more than 6 percent Wednesday after an Internet video showed flames spewing from the vehicle.
The driver said he believes he struck debris on the road. Tesla says every indication is that the fire was a result of damage caused by that collision.

 

[texex91]

I already posted the AP update on the other thread-- but basically the firefighter incident report suggests the fire DID involve the battery pack somehow.

Yes, fire may have spread to the battery pack considering its a primary part of the car. That doesn't mean it had anything to do with the cause of the fire. This is such a worthless thread as its just a bunch of speculation.

 

[brianman]

Here's what triangulates me to that conclusion:

1. Tesla's statement about the battery pack architecture protecting the car.
2. Wall St. sources saying they confirmed w/ the company it was the battery (let's see if any are gutsy enough to publish tomorrow!!)
3. Tesla's lack of stating the pack was NOT involved in the fire.
4. The fire department had trouble putting out the fire and it kept re-igniting.
5. Watching the video, the flames seem to come from the wheel wells, on both sides. consistent with the apparent venting structure of the pack.

An obvious competing theory doesn't even present itself. We can rule out collision with another car. We can rule out stuff in the frunk. I'm open to other possibilities, but what's left other than the infinite number of unobvious unknowns?

Sigh. Really? Ok, here we go.

1. Reread the statement. It said their design helped mitigate the problem. That says nothing about whether the actual contents of the battery are even involved in the event. For all we know they could just be talking about the structural impact the battery pack casing has on the vehicle's overall integrity.
2. A source saying something isn't evidence. It's a source providing -- presumably -- yet another opinion. Evidence is stuff like measurements, temperature readings, etc. not utterances of people no matter how informed they think they are.
3. You didn't say anything in your post about why you like ice cream. Thus I will presume you hate ice cream. I don't understand people like you that hate ice cream.
4. "Good point. No other substance on planet Earth other than Tesla's battery pack can reignite like that." (Sarcasm.)
5. "Good point. There's nothing else in the wheel well, like....say wheels... that could produce smoke or flames." (Sarcasm.)

[6.] There are dozens preceding your post. Apparently you're just skimming the thread and, frankly, are not even beginning to stretch your imagination.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I already posted the AP update on the other thread-- but basically the firefighter incident report suggests the fire DID involve the battery pack somehow.

I only see paraphrasing in the report. Will wait for that actual release of the report to see direct quotes.

 

[bareyb]

I'm happy to report that this story hasn't seemed to travel much beyond Tesla fan sites and Stock trading sites. My other forums where we are discussing the Model S have not posted anything about any of this. Not even the drop in the stock price. It would seem the rest of the World isn't all that interested. Of course, that doesn't mean some news source on TV won't pick it up, but that remains to be seen. I am hoping this is simply a case of a tempest in a Tea Pot.

 

[brianman]

From AP Wires (also on Seattle Times website):

They used a jack to lift the vehicle and a circular saw to gain access to the burning battery pack.

The closest thing we have to evidence thus far. Thank you, Newscutter.

 

[Matt_D]

Fyi, the fire department's report is referenced in this article. You can read it in its entirety; it seems to reference a battery in the front burning, and cutting to get to the battery. It further states water didn't extinguish the fire, only dry chemicals worked.

From the description, I cannot tell if they are referring to the 12V battery or the main pack; it would appear the front of the pack was compromised in a few places with holes from the object, but that's conjecture.

Either way, the design and engineering did its job and protected the occupants. Bottom line: no machine is impervious to intentional damage, and the S design lends itself to a high tolerance for abuse. I drive mine with no fear or concerns about its reliability or safety.

Tesla Model S Driver Hits Object On HOV Lane Near Kent, Washington, Car Smokes, Catches Fire; Is Lithium Battery Dangerous? [VIDEO]

 

[texex91]

APNewsBreak: Tesla Car Fire Involved Battery - ABC News

APNewsBreak: Tesla Car Fire Involved Battery

SEATTLE October 3, 2013 (AP)
By MIKE BAKER and TOM KRISHER Associated Press

A fire that engulfed the front end of a Tesla electric car also burned in the vehicle's battery pack.
In documents obtained by The Associated Press under Washington state public records law, firefighters describe their struggle to extinguish the flames burning a Model S car near Seattle on Tuesday.
Firefighters say in an incident narrative that the car fire appeared to be extinguished but then reignited, leading them to dismantle the front end of the vehicle. They used a jack to lift the vehicle and a circular saw to gain access to the burning battery pack.
Shares of Tesla Motors Inc. fell more than 6 percent Wednesday after an Internet video showed flames spewing from the vehicle.
The driver said he believes he struck debris on the road. Tesla says every indication is that the fire was a result of damage caused by that collision.

See highlighted area. End of story...sorry short sellers try again.

 

[EarlyAdopter]

All I can say is if this was a fire in the main traction battery pack, I am amazed and reassured it could be put out so easily. Gasoline fires cannot.

 

[GasDoc]

Could a coolant failure lead to to a battery pack fire? There are obviously hoses that need to run from the battery cooling system to the radiator. If memory serves, I recall seeing that coolant runs to the middle radiator while the side ones are charged with the modern equivalent of freon.

Striking an object in the road could lead to a rupture in the cooling system. If this system ruptured, could the battery overheat to the point of combustion?

 

[Krugerrand]

We need a full analysis to be published asap before people's imaginations run away with themselves.

Hmmm...think that happened 21 pages ago when a certain someone suggested an engine was involved. :smile:

 

[brianman]

They used a jack to lift the vehicle ....

I'm left with a burning (doh! sorry for the unintended pun) question:
Did they engage tow mode so that nobody would be injured by the air suspension auto-leveling?

 

[pfq1982]

Right, since there are over 200000 car fires a year, this IS irrelevant.

News flash pal--Cars can catch fire.

Look forward to more of your outsider opinions.

I hope Tesla doesn't quote you on that. NFPA says about 150k in cars per year. Then realize avg age of a car on the road is > 11 years, so all things equal Tesla BETTER have a way better per-miles-driven ratio given they are brand new, lower miles, and missing the engine block (the area accounting for > 50% of the fires, per NFPA)

https://www.nfpa.org/research/statistical-reports/vehicles/vehicle-fire-trends-and-patterns

 

[texex91]

I hope Tesla doesn't quote you on that. NFPA says about 150k in cars per year. Then realize avg age of a car on the road is > 11 years, so all things equal Tesla BETTER have a way better per-miles-driven ratio given they are brand new, lower miles, and missing the engine block (the area accounting for > 50% of the fires, per NFPA)

https://www.nfpa.org/research/statistical-reports/vehicles/vehicle-fire-trends-and-patterns

dude give it up. Go back to the BMW forums. No one really cares about your false posts and negative attitude. I understand you want to cast a negative light on this silly thing, but not going to work on this forum. Might want to try the short sellers forum or any other brand forum that is jealous of Tesla.

all news is good news. Can't wait for the Q3 earnings.

 

[Mr X]

Dibs on the rear rims and tires.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Fyi, the fire department's report is referenced in this article. You can read it in its entirety; it seems to reference a battery in the front burning, and cutting to get to the battery. It further states water didn't extinguish the fire, only dry chemicals worked.

From the description, I cannot tell if they are referring to the 12V battery or the main pack; it would appear the front of the pack was compromised in a few places with holes from the object, but that's conjecture.

Either way, the design and engineering did its job and protected the occupants. Bottom line: no machine is impervious to intentional damage, and the S design lends itself to a high tolerance for abuse. I drive mine with no fear or concerns about its reliability or safety.

Tesla Model S Driver Hits Object On HOV Lane Near Kent, Washington, Car Smokes, Catches Fire; Is Lithium Battery Dangerous? [VIDEO]

It seems like water did not extinguish the external fire (they had to use dry chemicals to do that), but water did work on the internal fire. If water can stop it doesn't seem too big of a danger. Does not seem to match a lithium cell based fire though, as that should not be extinguish-able with water (water helps reduce the heat, but if any cells caught fire, they would have to wait for it to burn out).

The silver lining is regardless of if there was a main battery fire, the car did an excellent job of isolating it from the passenger cabin and other parts of the car.

 

[BoscoBoy]

Phew! Really looking forward to the facts. All this speculation is exhausting...and perhaps pointless.

 

[tander]

Based on probabilities, I'm liking the 12v explanation more and more. That is a real, and known problem.

From what I recall from shop class (and my old Chemistry classes) the sulfuric acid in the battery can release hydrogen gas if it shorts, which could then cause an explosion. If that were to happen all of the plastics and fabrics in the front end could ignite and we could end up with this video.

Anyways, it seems more probable that a known problem that has damaged batteries enough to cause them to visibly deform could be the cause here, vs a failure in the main pack itself.

Though again, the fire could be consistent with any number of causes.

What is the 12v battery for anyway?

 

[Newscutter]

Just to clarify my position/interest in this topic. All this means is that there is just one less MS that I want. I still want all the other ones. Screw it-- who am I kidding? I'd take the toasted one if they offered it. Still cooler than my current car.

 

[brianman]

What is the 12v battery for anyway?

"Everything but propulsion" is, I think, a reasonable first approximation at answering your question.