-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model Y - Gigafactory Texas Production
- Thread starter Ron J.
- Start date
It’s unlikely to be glue or structural adhesive. Those things are generally heavy, may have curing issues and/or issues of degradation when poured in mass, and their adhesive properties aren’t important for this application except at the top and bottom of each “cell” as the story puts it. A better phrase might be “structural filler with glue used to attach it to the skins."
First look at Tesla's new structural battery pack that will power its future electric cars
Electrek obtained the first picture of Tesla's new structural battery pack with a honeycomb architecture that will power its future electric vehicles.electrek.co
See pics and descriptions. Very much "glue" or a "structural adhesive" put between the cells to make the pack much more rigid.
EDIT - this should surprise NO ONE. Go look at Sandy Munroe's teardown of a 2170-based Model Y. The pack may have 3 modules, but within each module the cells are rigidly glued together with this same blue structural adhesive. There is zero serviceability there.
It’s likely to be one of many materials that are better tailored for such use.....with much lighter weight and good sheer strength that has a long lifespan under the changing thermal conditions of a battery pack, and which bonds well with a high-tech adhesive at top and bottom, likely the same adhesive used to bond the batteries in place.
If you look at a more traditional honeycomb panel, the kind used in the aerospace industry, race yachts, some race car panels, the idea is as little mass between the top and bottom sheets as possible. Just making the thing one big chunk of adhesive would add a lot of weight, maybe introduce some other issues over time, cost a fair amount etc.
But yeah, your basic point seems on target. This thing is gonna be bonded together and its highly unlikely to be repairable cell-by-cell.
Last edited:
that didn’t happen. the guy posting on twitter had gotten a SA pitch including mention of a new battery and assumed 4680. It wasn’t.View attachment 775769
Probably end up with Intel and no 4680s… not worth the risk?!Currently scheduled for a Fremont AMD on 3/20..
The SA was referring to the nifty new lithium replacement for the small 12v that comes with the AMD chip etc..
Those look like induction wheels to me. If so, another LR variant.
Triplem086
Member
lol... those are not Performance he must be blind those are the 20" induction wheels, am i wrong?
BGOwner
Active Member
As with the below, and on Twitter, everyone seems to agree this is induction. I think Joe just made a mistake.
A point the guy missed in the youtube video is the Tesla 16% increase in capacity for the MYs when using 4680 cells was a claim from Battery Day bqck in Sept. 2020. Tesla has since then already increased the battery capacity by about 6% with an updated 3170 pack and the EPA range number also was increased a little with that change.. So it would appear there is only another 10% to be gained with a fully populated 4680 structural battery pack as compared to the current Fremont MYs. Also the weight has already dropped a little with the rear mega casting now being used in the Frement MYs.
Destiny1701
22’ M3LR ‘DrkNite’/ 22’ MYP BliueRocket
Wait has Perf MY actually come up in range?
Wasn’t aware as it’s at 303m now. Oh …was it 291 prior in 2020? That’s up 4%.
His basic conceptualizing is fine, but he still makes some assumptions to get the numbers. He’s citing for MYLF increase to 34-350 miles of range under EPA system. But... not if Tesla dials back the capacity of the pack a tad to take advantage of the minor range gain from the drop in weigh. And he is calculating range and the more serious improvements in 0-60 (half a second for MYLR) based on an assumption of 400kg in total weight loss.
That is a big assumption.
And the 0-60 gain is such he basically says Tesla will have to electronically dial back the power to match the current.
These assumptions seem off.
voip-ninja
Give me some sugar baby
He put a lot of effort into producing a video that steps through the logic being used for the assertions he is making, and an attempt to actually show what the performance difference would look like if Tesla didn't nerf the cars so that they perform similarly.... which is definitely likely so they can avoid having two cars of the same configuration with two diff performance specs.
Pretty easy to throw peanuts from the peanut gallery I guess.
@White MY picture. My immediate thought after seeing this.
Employee 1: customer rejected this one on delivery. Something about apparent gaps. Employee 2: it's within spec isn't it?
Forum members: I told you not to wait for GT MY builds!
My criticisms were modest and accurate, not random peanuts from someone who gets all their information from the internet.
Most people here who have tracked the weight discussion carefully think the weight difference will be pretty modest as the initial number Elon spouted didn’t take into account a lot of things such as the fact that some of the weight savings he cited -- the rear casting -- were already in place. It was pretty vague. If you know much about materials you can make an educated guess about how much weight could be removed. Some of us have actually done engineering -- composite powerboat manufacturing for me -- and aren’t just adding together a bunch of vague numbers from Tesla that didn’t have enough context even when originally uttered. On the plus side, maybe we’ll have some accurate answers in the next few weeks and we won’t have to guess, indulge in wishful thinking etc.
For me the weight savings outweigh the modest panel gap issue.@White MY picture. My immediate thought after seeing this.
Employee 1: customer rejected this one on delivery. Something about apparent gaps. Employee 2: it's within spec isn't it?
Forum members: I told you not to wait for GT MY builds!
SA to customer 1: Ok, ok, the frunk lid gap is a LITTLE out of spec. I will grant you that. Just accept delivery, leave it with us and it will be ready in 2 weeks.
Destiny1701
22’ M3LR ‘DrkNite’/ 22’ MYP BliueRocket
You know I was thinking…just getting forged rims is around 10lbs a side so -40lbs there…
I could lose some personal weight about 20lbs…so now - 60lbs haha.
Take out the mobile charger bag and just keep the one universal adapter…say -15lb there…remove the cover for the rear trunk lower cavity 6lbs…remove the reverse speaker from exterior 2 lbs…
I’m at 83lbs and didn’t even hit one piece of crazy technology nor got into any discussion about casts or manuf weight.
Just sayin…
sometimes you just gotta turn it all off and keep it simple.
I could lose some personal weight about 20lbs…so now - 60lbs haha.
Take out the mobile charger bag and just keep the one universal adapter…say -15lb there…remove the cover for the rear trunk lower cavity 6lbs…remove the reverse speaker from exterior 2 lbs…
I’m at 83lbs and didn’t even hit one piece of crazy technology nor got into any discussion about casts or manuf weight.
Just sayin…
sometimes you just gotta turn it all off and keep it simple.Similar threads
