Second Fire cause by impact with a metal object. Recall necessary?

[JRP3]

Spray trunk liner on it? Hope you never need a replacement battery ...

Mask off the bolt holes and the mating joints to the car and you should be fine. I don't know if it would help much with point loading impact, but it might. Testing would be easy, get some aluminum, drop a point load on it, and test another piece with bedliner. Test a few different brands.

 

[mknox]

I'm not particularly worried myself, but do think the battery makes the car more vulnerable to these types of thing. It's a HUGE target. A gasoline tank, by comparison, is relatively small and most are tucked up underneath towards the rear and ahead of the rear axle. I think driving over debris is going to more typically impact near the front of the car, and sure there are fuel lines and such, but again a much smaller target.

Again, not personally worried, but public perception can be a powerful thing. Will be interesting to see how Tesla responds with any kind of re-design.

 

[SteveG3]

I'm sure everyone has noticed the gap in the poll... option #4, wait until more details released before making a call on this. Option #4 would make it a very boring poll, so I'm not suggesting a change

All kidding aside, I'm sure that Elon Musk is looking at this with even more scrutiny than those of us at TMC.

Remember how Elon was nearly impossibly personally looking at every single Model S to come of the line this time last year? Remember the level of detail he put in his blog response to the Broder incident?

That is the kind of attention and follow through Elon has done in what he deemed critical moments in the reality and perception of his product and company.

As a shareholder, I find these precedents reassuring... if Musk is pouring himself into this incident the same way, I even see the possibility that his response will eventually, perhaps taking months or even years to win over the public on Tesla's response, add value to the Tesla brand (that's not to diminish that this could turn out to be a real and expensive problem).

 

[anticitizen13.7]

In all my 35+ years of driving, I have never hit an "object" in the road. I'm not real worried about it. Apparently the worst thing that can happen is that my car would tell me to pull over. Even if caught on fire, it would vent the fire under the car long after I was out of the car. Assuming no helpful Firemen come along and start beating holes into the top with axes the car would be fine and my insurance could deal with it. This is all assuming that the latest fire is not a hoax… The timing seems awfully suspect. I'll reserve final judgement until the latest incident has been investigated more thoroughly. Gonna laugh if it was staged and the stock goes zooming back up tomorrow.

In several decades I've never hit anything either, but the presence of road debris may be related to local conditions: whether many people use tow hitches, how careful people are with their equipment, and the promptness of transportation departments in removing dangerous objects from the road. In my locality, few people aside from business operators use tow hitches, and the transportation dept. is quick to remove everything from roadkill deer to discarded tires.

 

[Grendal]

I don't think a recall is necessary. If any change to the car is necessary, it will be in relation to the settings of the air suspension, and can be resolved with a SW update.

I've mentioned this once before. The problem might not be with the battery pack at all. In front of the battery pack on the bottom of the car there is a plastic aerodynamic cover. It is not metal and could easily be where the metal objects have penetrated upwards into the battery pack. Once penetrating this weak plastic with forward momentum it would drive the object with force into the front of the pack. This might not be what actually happened but it is possible that this is a weak point for penetration. We can talk about how strong the shielding is on the actual pack all day long but this plastic comes before the pack and will be the first thing an object will hit when travelling at speeds.

This would also be an easy PR fix for the company to simply change this one piece from plastic to a strong metal.

I voted that Tesla needs to do something just to alleviate people's fears.

 

[jerry33]

The only reason I voted yes was for public perception. Stuff happens, and it happens to every car. Doing something physical, such as replacing the plastic dust cover with a metal one or adding some kind of debris baffle that lowers over a certain speed, would do wonders for the public's perception. Saying "nothing to do because these are flukes" isn't going to fly given the media's love of "if it bleeds it leads".

 

[JRP3]

I've mentioned this once before. The problem might not be with the battery pack at all. In front of the battery pack on the bottom of the car there is a plastic aerodynamic cover. It is not metal and could easily be where the metal objects have penetrated upwards into the battery pack. Once penetrating this weak plastic with forward momentum it would drive the object with force into the front of the pack.

Actually looking at the pictures there is quite a bit more between the pack and the plastic cover, including a cross member. Not saying that it couldn't be an issue but just pointing out that it's not simply air between the plastic shield and the front of the pack.

 

[Seven7]

How about replacing the plastic with thin steel, but add thicker plate to areas not protected by the cross member and other stuff between the battery and the road. Anybody have other ideas about up armoring the battery pack? Try to keep it light in weight...

 

[glhs272]

Since this incident I have been wondering if any of the fires were started by pack denting or deforming. I would think that the pack would have to be penetrated for this to happen, but I am not sure. The reports from the first fire indicated that the object actually penetrated the pack. The Mexico incident is unclear. This latest incident also has yet to be disclosed. If pack penetration is a requirement, perhaps looking into materials and methods of jet engine manufacturers. Do a google or youtube search on blade-out testing on the turbofan engines. They have to survive a catastrophic blade failure and not allow any debris to leave the engine enclosure. Perhaps there is something we can learn from these engine manufactures about keeping battery packs from being punctured. Any aviation experts out there that could comment about this?

Some interesting info in this article: http://imechanica.org/files/1-Jet engine fan blade containment using an alternate geometry.pdf

 

[neroden]

Since I've never seen a recall for a punctured gas tank (and I've experienced more than one personally), no I don't think a recall is justified.

It is true that public perceptions are way off from reality; the Model S performs better than gas cars, but the uninformed are not *comparing* it to gas cars, for whatever reason. It certainly catches fire more easily than a horse, maybe that's what people are comparing it to. :wink:

 

[NigelM]

It certainly catches fire more easily than a horse, maybe that's what people are comparing it to. :wink:

Actually there are over 1,000 barn/stable fires per year and they're caused by a myriad of reasons. Barns are generally built mostly from combustible material and they're full of very dry, combustible materials so even a spark in the wrong place can start a fire. Hay can even spontaneously combust if it's been put up too moist and the bales are piled up.

Relevance: I'm more concerned about one of my barns catching fire than I am about one of my Teslas catching fire.

 

[vfx]

Say Tesla spends 10s of thousands and develops a "fix" for the MS pack that prevent damage from the 25 ton force and then does a massive recall at great expense totaling millions.
Then someone with the mod runs over a humongous steel pipe (as has already happened) and the penetration force of that one is 26 tons and there is another fire? What would that mean? Tesla has admitted weakness and wasted money? EV's are unsafe?

Guys, accidents happen. While many auto manufacturers have left out a $50 part that would prevent auo fires to save money, that is not Tesla's style. Elon drives his kids in this car. It's as safe as he could make it barring fluke road debris and drunk driving.

 

[tslafan123]

Doesn't look like there will be a recall now. Statements from "the owner"

From a Model S owner in Tennessee | Blog | Tesla Motors

 

[JRP3]

Actually there are over 1,000 barn/stable fires per year and they're caused by a myriad of reasons.

That's more of a comparison with a garage fire than a vehicle fire.

Say Tesla spends 10s of thousands and develops a "fix" for the MS pack that prevent damage from the 25 ton force and then does a massive recall at great expense totaling millions.
Then someone with the mod runs over a humongous steel pipe (as has already happened) and the penetration force of that one is 26 tons and there is another fire? What would that mean? Tesla has admitted weakness and wasted money? EV's are unsafe?

Guys, accidents happen. While many auto manufacturers have left out a $50 part that would prevent auo fires to save money, that is not Tesla's style. Elon drives his kids in this car. It's as safe as he could make it barring fluke road debris and drunk driving.

Telsa unfortunately has to play by different rules, and I don't think a modest improvement would be that costly. It may not need to be a recall but going forward there could be a redesign that further improves the vehicle. Frankly just eliminating the suspension drop at speed would probably significantly reduce the likely hood of striking road debris. There is a reason we aren't seeing this with other EV's, and ride height may explain much of it.

Doesn't look like there will be a recall now. Statements from "the owner"

From a Model S owner in Tennessee | Blog | Tesla Motors

Not sure how that has anything to do with a recall, that's up to NHTSA and Tesla.

 

[Thumper]

The only change to the car that makes sense to me is a software patch that lets us choose the high speed ride height. If you want, you could select standard height if you are going to be in heavy traffic and have no chance to swerve around an obstruction. If you are going to be in open-road conditions where you can see well ahead, you could choose to use the lower setting.

 

[Jack6591]

While I do not believe a recall is the appropriate response, active collision can and should be incorporated into Tesla vehicles as soon as it developed and proven.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

While I do not believe a recall is the appropriate response, active collision can and should be incorporated into Tesla vehicles as soon as it developed and proven.

Agree. IMO an active collision system working at all speeds should be incorporated into Tesla vehicles. Problem is that I don't see how such a system could help to avoid road debris. In fact it looks like if at highway speeds a road debris would be detected the system couldn't raise the car in time to avoid it.

 

[jerry33]

That's more of a comparison with a garage fire than a vehicle fire.

Telsa unfortunately has to play by different rules, and I don't think a modest improvement would be that costly. It may not need to be a recall but going forward there could be a redesign that further improves the vehicle. Frankly just eliminating the suspension drop at speed would probably significantly reduce the likely hood of striking road debris. There is a reason we aren't seeing this with other EV's, and ride height may explain much of it.

Is there another EV that uses air suspension? I'd rather see the suspension drop as a choice, just like creep and traction control.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

@Jerry

IMO to avoid the suspension drop would likely not solve the problem because to prevent the accident with the road debris you could need to raise the car another inch in a millisec. (Maybe some calculations would be needed)

 

[JRP3]

Is there another EV that uses air suspension?

Not that I'm aware of.