Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

See? I KNEW body castings and structural battery packs were a bad idea!

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

timk225

Active Member
Mar 24, 2016
2,140
2,486
Pittsburgh

Even before reports like this were coming out, I knew that structural battery packs and body castings were a bad idea. At one time I considered getting a Model Y, but no more, I'll stick with my '18 Model 3.

And it doesn't take a genius to figure out why. Body castings don't flex, they CRACK, and the cracks can go a long way. Even welding them up might not be good enough.

And structural batteries? Come on now. Batteries have enough problems with providing power. They don't need to be flexed and stressed as a body member on top of that. I've read that this battery can still be changed but it is a much bigger job.

Now I'm sure this new "technology" is all well and good for Tesla, get the vehicle made as fast and cheaply as possible, and sell it for big profits. But when repairs from a wreck are needed, they are taking the Apple route of "just buy a new car / phone / tablet / laptop".

Modular is better. Unbolt a battery pack and swap another one in. Sheet metal can be easier than castings that involve so much of the car that changing one is a massive job. Instead of one huge casting that is the whole rear half of the vehicle, maybe 4-6 castings bolted together that can be changed more easily, as a compromise.

I need to find a way to get in touch with Tesla top engineers and hold periodic video or in person meetings with them, to review their plans and go over UI / display improvements. I'm not saying I know everything better than them, but I do have useful input to share.
 
Yeah. I wonder why other OEM's are starting to use castings? Toyota and Volvo.


Not just stronger, but reduces weight and waste says Toyota.

Going to go with the herd starting to follow the mind here. Mind being Tesla. Is the heard always right? No.

I understand your concern, but I think you might be a dog barking up a never ending tree.
 

Even before reports like this were coming out, I knew that structural battery packs and body castings were a bad idea. At one time I considered getting a Model Y, but no more, I'll stick with my '18 Model 3.

And it doesn't take a genius to figure out why. Body castings don't flex, they CRACK, and the cracks can go a long way. Even welding them up might not be good enough.

And structural batteries? Come on now. Batteries have enough problems with providing power. They don't need to be flexed and stressed as a body member on top of that. I've read that this battery can still be changed but it is a much bigger job.

Now I'm sure this new "technology" is all well and good for Tesla, get the vehicle made as fast and cheaply as possible, and sell it for big profits. But when repairs from a wreck are needed, they are taking the Apple route of "just buy a new car / phone / tablet / laptop".

Modular is better. Unbolt a battery pack and swap another one in. Sheet metal can be easier than castings that involve so much of the car that changing one is a massive job. Instead of one huge casting that is the whole rear half of the vehicle, maybe 4-6 castings bolted together that can be changed more easily, as a compromise.

I need to find a way to get in touch with Tesla top engineers and hold periodic video or in person meetings with them, to review their plans and go over UI / display improvements. I'm not saying I know everything better than them, but I do have useful input to share.

That report is nothing about the manufacturing.

Tesla's restrictive approach to repair drives up costs.

The battery coolant issue in the article is Tesla treating too many battery problems as requiring replacement, instead of fixing the battery. They have apparently begun repairing a common old Model S battery problem, but probably only because they don't want the PR disaster that would otherwise be the result.

The article has no significant research and even admits it itself in some places.
 
recently Tesla showed actual replacement gigacast pieces they have to provide to body shops repairing gigacastings post crashes
OP I hear your point, but we will have to see, think for serious crashes, the gigacast might be scrapped and maybe due to safety that's a good thing
 
IMG_1644.jpeg
IMG_1645.jpeg

Need a spreadsheet for Austin build MY owners checking their front castings for cracks. This guy’s FB video shows his flashlight shining through the cracks (not just paint crack).
 
This problem is not unique to Tesla. Guys on the Rivian forum are complaining of similar, and they have neither a structural battery pack, nor gigacasting architecture. I am not watching many other models these days but I'm guessing a stop on other forums would yield the same answer.

The number of EVs has out paced growth in both OEM and after market service and support options. Too few shops have the expertise, desire, etc to work on HVDC. Too little repair history on battery packs to know easily what is a lightly damaged but still safe pack. Default is to declare battery needs replaced for anything worse than a surface scratch. Estimates come in high, insurance balks, car is declared totalled.

I think the issues will somewhat work through in time as always parts availability goes up, and EV capable workforce improves. Structural battery packs are never going to be cheap to replace, but increased supply and credit for the one headed to recycling may help. Might be years before the market equalizes out, but I trust it will if Right to Repair isn't unduly blocked.
 
To me it looks like a hot tear/hot crack. This occurs during cast/cooling when the material is still semi-molten and weak, and the shrinkage stresses essentially pull the material apart. it's impossible to have a casting w/o some cast-related issues (shrinkage porosity, gas porosity, hot tears, inclusions, etc). The key issue is keeping the artifacts small as-manufactured enough to prevent crack propagation. That said, that crack may not grow. It depends on the stress state it sees in that location. My guess is it's low and that's why Tesla says it's OK. The problem is the accumulation of cyclic stress leading to fatigue damage. This is usually addressed by something called the Endurance Limit, and there will be a stress cycle/life (Sn) curve. When you start throwing in large cracks and flaws, the SN curve becomes very different, because now a fatigue crack that may have needed 10,000,000 stress cycles to initiate, now has a short cut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dakhlkt22
And it doesn't take a genius to figure out why. Body castings don't flex, they CRACK, and the cracks can go a long way. Even welding them up might not be good enough.
Cast aluminum has some ductility. Less than stamped steel, I agree, but it's not guaranteed to crack. moreover, some of those cracks (depending on where they are present) will arrest. Consider the assembly of the spot welded stamped steel montage that comprises an inner fender. The total area of (spot) weld joint relative to the inner fender surface area is tiny, and yet it hold together, usually long after the car is hauled off as scrap. Tesla now has a continuous "monocoque" casting. This is like having your montage of stamped steel parts 100% welded at every joint with zero gaps. It's huge overkill. That's probably why Tesla doesn't care about some cracks. However, this crack that we're all talking about is pretty big. Still looks like a hot tear to me, but if it was my car I would measure it for a base-line and then remeasure every month, or quarter, or year. Maybe use a small hammer/punch to put indents next to the crack tips,,,
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Transformer
I wonder what will happen when that car is jacked up with a floor jack instead of a lift.
Depends on where the crack is. Kind looks like it could be the intersection of the cowl, firewall and upper fender. Given the massive amount of "material redundancy" in these castings, I suspect that in the vast majority of cases, the casting-process-related cracks don't grow, which is probably why Tesla is not fixing it.

Tesla most definitely has dynamic FEA models of the various giga castings and all sorts of boundary conditions. The models will incorporate various types of flaws/cracks in many locations to see if they grow over time in various stress states and scenarios. If the hot crack is in a low stress area (hopefully so), it will look exactly the same in 20 years.
 
There is no evidence in video or pictures that these cracks are even on a Tesla. FUD.
How many other car manufacturers have a mega-cast press making entire subframe sections now? Last I heard, that list began and ended with Tesla. Having just commission the two largest and only machines capable of doing that in the world in their Houston TX Gigafactory I wasn't aware that any others had bene made, especially for other manufacturers.