We made a pretty sweet clutchless two speed for the Nikola truck, but they never got the damn thing running so we never got to see it in action.
A look at the new Tesla cells
61 - 80 of 125 Posts
I'd have thought the flat top for the first few thousand is exactly what you'd expect from a PMSM motor see here esp. fig 8
Using this as a model predicts the S100DL performance quite accurately with published numbers, but as the model shows, more torque low in the rev range will not help as the limiting factor is tyre grip.
This model also lets you add an ideal two-speed box, but playing with that shows it doesn't seem to buy much on a road car, given the wide rev range of a Tesla motor, as dcb has said.
.. I forgot to mention...
...you do know the Tesla is an Induction motor , not a PMSM. ?
( sory but i had a hitch with the forum and could not get a login for a while
)For anyone that missed it, the "44160" cell format rumour has been neatly killed and explained as a miscommunication during a Tesla presentation where some tech guy stated that the Model 3 would use 4416 cells......
.....he litterally meant a quantity of 4,416 cells in the pack !
The cells are , of course, the new 21700 , 5.0 Ah capacity Tesla cell.
Which puts the M3 "long range" pack right at 83-85 kWh max capacity.
.....he litterally meant a quantity of 4,416 cells in the pack !
The cells are , of course, the new 21700 , 5.0 Ah capacity Tesla cell.
Which puts the M3 "long range" pack right at 83-85 kWh max capacity.
.. I forgot to mention...
...you do know the Tesla is an Induction motor , not a PMSM. ?
( sory but i had a hitch with the forum and could not get a login for a while
Not anymore
, but as Brian says, same applies to induction motor.Yes saw the M3 pack details, included it in my M3 simulator
Had to assume 4.75Ah for the 2170 cells, as published by Samsung (cf Panasonic??)
But with that assumption, the short range version comes in ~10% under the 220 mile number, so presumably they are relying on a process improvement down the road.
Attachments
Yeh, I get that but was more interested in the Model 3 battery and how we might use the salvage
There is so little hard data for the Semi that this seems like a difficult conclusion to support. A battery technology improvement over the Model S/X may be necessary, but a factor of two?
Tesla has been claiming a high content of Model 3 components in the Semi; with the gearboxes being different, and none of the cab, structure, steering, brakes, suspension, axles, wheels, or tires being shared, it seems necessary (and reasonable) that all of these components would all be straight from the Model 3:
- battery modules (from this description, four in a Model 3 and about four dozen in the Semi)
- inverters (one per motor)
- motors (four of them in the Semi, one to two in a Model 3)
- BMS
Since Model 3 modules built of the 2170 cells are presumably superior to the 18650's in current production models, my guess is that modules which you salvage from Model 3's after they go into actual production will be the same as what will be used in the Semi (and presumably Roadster 2). Or at least the cells in them will be the same.Yeh, I get that but was more interested in the Model 3 battery and how we might use the salvage
The Semi's requirements may have driven the shift to larger modules, so that there is not such an impractically large number of them in the 1 MWh Semi pack... or perhaps it was just simplification for production cost efficiency. Either way, those big modules are going to be a challenge for packaging in many DIY projects.
61 - 80 of 125 Posts
