The Disappointing Truth About Tesla's 4680 Battery Cell..
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 พ.ค. 2024
- Go to: drinktrade.com/teslaspace for a free bag of coffee with any subscription purchase!
The Disappointing Truth About Tesla's 4680 Battery Cell..
Last video: Why Tesla’s AI Super Computer Is About To Take Over!
• Why Tesla’s AI Super C...
► Patreon: / theteslaspace
► Join Our Discord Server: / discord
► Subscribe to our other channel, The Space Race: / @thespaceraceyt
► Subscribe to The Tesla Space newsletter: www.theteslaspace.com
Subscribe: / @theteslaspace
Welcome to the Tesla Space, where we share the latest news, rumors, and insights into all things Tesla, Space X, Elon Musk, and the future! We'll be showing you all of the new details around the Tesla Model 3 2022, Tesla Model Y 2022, along with the Tesla Cybertruck when it finally arrives, it's already ordered!
Instagram: / theteslaspace
Twitter: / theteslaspace
Business Email: tesla@ellify.com
#Tesla #TheTeslaSpace #Elon - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
As somebody that attended the Battery Day presentation in person, I was very confused by why everybody got so hyped up about the 4680 cells and structural pack. My understanding from day one is that it would take 5-15 years to realize the numbers presented in the presentation, but most people for some reason thought it would happen within a year.
18650 and the 2170 cells have been optimized over and over again to the point where they are close to as good as they can get. The 4680 on the other hand is still in it's infancy and still has many many optimizations available before it gets anywhere close to being fully optimized.
It's essentially the same as SpaceX with the tried and tested Merlin engine and the new Raptor engine. They have been optimizing the Merlin engine for years now to the point that it is insanely reliable and efficient. The problem is that they have gotten almost everything that they can out of that design. Now they have developed the Raptor engine which has the potential to be significantly better than the Merlin in the long-term. As of now though, the Merlin is still significantly more reliable and efficient than the Raptor. It just takes a long time for a new design to become better than an old design that has been optimized for a long time. This is especially true when the old product is being manufactured at an order of magnitude of a higher volume than the new product.
so true. follow any product- mechanical or electronic & that principle holds. the entire reason for GM, FORD & mopar factory race teams? a development test bed for improving engine & drive train technology. do you like your corvette? guess what? that engine was developed by GM factory racing tech. at one point or another- most major gains in that car were once on a nascar or indy car.
do you like how your dodge demon rips 'em a new one from red light to red light? guess what? at one point or another- some of the advancements in your engine were in MOPAR's NHRA drag racer, competing the fastest 1/4 mile on the planet.
And yet, even with it's actual capabilities, it makes the production already much simpler and cheaper and last but not least, Tesla can produce it inhouse. Another puzzle into the full vertical integration scheme.
@@dogmader pro noblem days something. month anything years. lmao. dude- chat bot broken is it?
Elon did NOT say it would take 5-15 years to bring out the 4680s. He should have if that was the going to be the case. He promised a much shorter time frame.
@@billsrelectric Anything that elon says about a timeframe is already a running joke.
Appreciate constructive criticism. There’s too little of that in the Tesla community.
Are you guys living in a bubble? Tesla investors have raised an absolute shit storm of criticism😮
@@Scooter-K- He said "Tesla community", not "Tesla investors".
the moats of the 4680 cell aren't apparent to everyone- because not everyone bothered to follow battery development. you may recall that tesla acquired maxwell technologies awhile back. as you may know- a HUGE problem with lithium battery manufacture is a bottleneck during the application of lithium. the old method (non-4680) is to dissolve lithium in a solvent- then spray it onto the strip. then, the strip is air dried. this process is extremely slow. maxwell's goal was simply to speed up the process. to that end- their solution was to take the raw lithium & simply apply it dry- thus eliminating solvent mix & drying time. what they did NOT expect- was a VERY WONDERFUL side effect- almost NO battery degradation. little is known about exactly WHY the old process causes it- but apparently- liquifying the lithium & spray application 'kicks off' the formation of dendrites- which is what gives lithium it's current shelf life. after testing- Jeff Dahn has determined that 4680 dry application method will result in a 50 year shelf life- and a 3.5 million mile pack... THAT- changes EVERYTHING. cars that can outlast the original owner? wall power & megapacks that cost less than 7 cents per kwh over the life of the pack? OH YEAH. prepare to be WOWED. this IS the million mile battery. battery day was strangely silent about it. the incredible benefits of dry application were ALL OVER maxwell's website when they made the discovery. then tesla bought it- and the website was taken down- by the next day- NOTHING. tesla does this though- sandy munroe pointed it out- "tesla lies"... they withhold 'nuggets' of some incredible things- then just SPRING IT on everyone when least expected. as for the density- you have to remember- tabless architecture has been tried in the lab- no one could even come close to making it work- tesla DID IT. look back to 2009- follow the history. EVERY single advancement tesla has made- has CONSISTENTLY been the same. elon sets aggressive time lines- all the nay sayers bitch & moan & say it's impossible, 'defying laws of physics'... blah blah blah. then? model S. model 3. model Y. SEMI.. .with better specs than anyone- at a better price than anyone. AND? we still have the whiners. one day- once they've reached the 4680's FULL speed of manufacture & efficiency- the whiners will STILL be saying "yah- but it took 5 years more"... some youtuber will post a snapshot of a model Y with 400,000 miles... and NO BATTERY DEGRADATION... then 1 million.. .then 2 million... and WHEN that happens? everyone will have forgotten- that it all started with elon- scouring the globe for the next best thing- and finding a little startup company that makes ultra-capacitors who solved the battery degradation issue & created the greatest energy storage solution ever to hit the planet.
OF COURSE 4680's didn't EXPLODE onto the shelf overnight. neither did: vacuum tubes, solid state electronics, internal combustion engine tech, cars, rockets, lasers, radio, wireless networking... SHALL I GO ON? have some patience. gen X & Z are an entire GENERATION of ADD brats. grow up.
Obviously know your info. I remember reading something about this, the acquisition of Maxwell, and next thing I knew it was not talked about. I also remember a blip about massive improvements in degradation. This is a really big............HUGE deal and should make us all step back and realize that 20 miles is garbage. If they charge fast for that occasional >250 mild trip, that's good enough for me. The infrastructure is already in place and only getting bigger and bigger DAILY. For me, I work for a living. I drive 30 miles per day. With my LR that's one charge AT HOME, per week on average. So maybe I charge once every 6 days. LOOK AT THE BIGGER PICTURE FOLKS. Elon is so far ahead of all of us, we are catching up on old news. He is most likely doing things we won't really understand for a year or more. The 4680 may not be up to initial expectations, but given my limited understanding, I expect a simple delay. Like always, but ultimately delivering. This isn't Star Citizen people. This is the real deal because they deliver. Over and over again. The driver gets lost once in a while, but he always arrives. Now, explain to me why all my patients tell me Tesla's are burning up everywhere? I'm not hearing it anywhere? What's the deal ?
@@jasonziter the 'burning tesla' narrative is just exactly that- a story. to date- the number of tesla's that pulled a 'chevy bolt' candle stick trick have been?
EXACTLY ZERO.
one HILARIOUS case- a model S ALLEGEDLY caught on fire 'for no reason'. it occurred late at night in a subdivision- one witness saw the guy park the car, in the middle of the street- (strange?) and slowly walk away- leaving the area- with the door open. then, a couple minutes later- suddenly- the car starts smoking & caught on fire. the driver who walked away reported to news sources that the car caught on fire while he was driving it and he had to leap from the car with flames shooting out, barely escaping. later, when questioned- the driver claimed he stayed with the car til fire trucks arrived- but the fire department claimed the driver was not there when they arrived. the news reporter showed up to interview the ONE witness- and the entire narrative fell apart... so the "tesla catches fire" story hit one line- and then total silence.. .once they realized they'd been duped. and retraction? OF COURSE NOT.
all the other fires? caused by crashes. a complete normality... for gas & for EV's. then there's the case of the 'mystery' lawsuits- ambulance chasers who represent NO ONE- other than "the public interest"... who try to sue tesla with claims of 'spontaneous fire'... only to be shot down once NHTSA published their findings:
this one being nearly a CONSTANT habit.
how much fun would it be to follow THAT money trail of law firms back to its' source? I'll save you the search- GM, FORD, NISSAN, HONDA, TOYOTA, the american petroleum institute, (APi) and opec.
remember the national news story of the new model S that 'crashed while in full self driving' with NO ONE at the wheel? the first barny fife cop on the scene SWORE 'no one was driving'.. as did the rescue/first responders, (however- failing to mention that their seatbelts were NOT fastened) the news RELISHED that one for about a week. then, tesla dug up the guy's file- & found the guy did not pay for FSD. also- in the area of the crash- no street markings- which means, even navigate on autopilot would NOT have engaged. then NHTSA investigation of the car's 'little black box' revealed that the driver never even attempted to engage autopilot, nor did they fasten the seat belts. a month after that- and a full investigation by NHTSA- they found a house with outdoor security camera footage of the ENTIRE incident. two guys- got in the FRONT seat of the car- did NOT fasten their seat belts- and drove some distance- then the driver gunned the throttle at a corner- didn't make the corner & slammed into a huge tree. they guy in the front passenger seat was thrown into the back- the driver was thrown into the passenger seat- both men unconscious, laid there til the car started smoking... then caught fire- and they burned alive because they were unconscious from being knocked around with no seatbelt. retraction? OF COURSE NOT!
see the pattern? cover the lies- ignore the truth- look for EVERY chance you can to write bad PR for tesla. where does NBC, ABC & CBS get ALL their revenue stream? advertising. what is it that tesla doesn't spend ONE SINGLE DIME on?
ADVERTISING.
who DOES spend on advertising? GM. FORD.. ETC. & here's one "chevron with textron! good for YOUR car".... and NBC's wallet.
government data collected on car fires shows that gasoline cars are 100x more likely to catch fire- how low would the EV number be if you didn't count the chevy volt?! food for thought.
@@jasonziter very true. energy density for new battery tach ALWAYS follows a curve. did with nicads, nickel-metal-hydride lithium 18650, and 2170's. it's hauntingly a lot like watching the steady increase of processor speed in pc's. but the REAL breakthrough of the 4680- is the almost complete & total lack of ANY dendrite formation. THAT ALONE would mean that- even if the pack density only gets to the same level as the old lithiums? 4680 is king- no cobalt? no degredation? holy never ending power storage bat man!
Point is indeed that once the physical dimensions of the new cell where established, the machine to build the machine could be constructed. Now the cell itself can evolve without impact to car production. It is a very smart way to organize the plants conversions. You migrate the plants as the production of the cells picks-up; or vise versa.
Let me add one note: "Tabless" is technically wrong. The internal electrode must be connected to the external pole of the battery somehow.
Therefore the 46800 isn't "tab-less" but has a connection that resemble a "continuous tab", a feature that greatly reduces the internal impedance - and therefore the electric losses. But it can't do nothing against the much reduced heat dissipation. Relative to specific power, the 46800 has 70% of the heat radiating surface of a 18650...
True, but heat also flows better through the higher tab-crosssection. Also you dont have to dissipate heat you didn't generate in the first place.
Tab is something that protrudes. It's now pretty much a surface. I e. Tabless despite multiple tabs folded down as a surface.
The long term potential of the 4680 is in scaled production. The efficiency of production reduces cost per but keep in mind that battery chemistry is changing and hopefully improving. If the manufacturing of the current 4680 is able to ramp up then they will probably be able to tweak the chemistry seamlessly. They keep the advantages of the production line and improve the chemistry when it happens. This is an unknown of course but things are changing so fast that flexibility in production, like with the changes they make on the run to Tesla cars, is a big advantage long term.
Considering they said it would be a less energy dense battery, and the fact that they were talking about three different kinds of batteries at battery day.
Lithium iron phosphate: inexpensive least energy dense
One about manganese
And another I can't remember
But they showed pictures of the model 3 Y S and X for long range and the Cybertruck and semi for the highest energy density batteries.
Yeah it was confusing especially since they didn't talk about it ever since.
But the most important part was getting the cost down and shrinking the footprint of the factory meaning that if they update the current factory to the new standard they could have about five times as much production (watch battery day to get more accurate information I can't remember)
I think there are a few things to keep in mind:
1. At battery day Elon did say there were a lot of issues to solve in the new manufacturing process. Many, if not all, of us expected them to solve them quicker than they have, but when innovating at the cutting edge you run into lots of unforeseen issues that you have to work through.
2. Covid and global supply shortages put a huge strain on manufacturing. I'm sure Tesla kept working on the batteries, but I also wouldn't be surprised to learn that they pulled engineers from that project to help keep plants making cars. Model Y ramp is simply much more important than CT or 4680 ramp. They did this with solar during 3 launch.
3. It's important to remember that while we as consumers want to see the returns of the 4680's from a performance standpoint, at least half of the benefit to Tesla is the reduced manufacturing cost, reduced cap x, reduced space required for the manufacturing, and the integration of structural pack in the manufacturing process with the end castings. These are HUGE savings to Tesla that many seem to overlook and the media referred to it as "some manufacturing improvement" in their reporting. There isn't a manufacturing company of any sort that wouldn't drool over any of these improvements, much less all of them. Just the manufacturing aspects are absolutely mind blowing. This is how Tesla is going to be able to continue to stress the rest of the auto industry by reducing prices and still maintaining high margins.
4. Elon has stated before that he doesn't think people need more than about 300 or so miles, so I don't expect him to waste a ton of batteries on super long range versions of cars while battery supply is low, especially with CT coming soon and Semi ramping. I was really surprised that the first 4680 cars from Texas were such low range vehicles, but from an efficiency and manufacturing standpoint it makes a ton of sense. Those first cars were basically just practice production runs to prove the battery and the structural pack in the real world.
5. We have only seen the LFP version of the 4680. Elon outlined three different cathode materials at battery day: Iron based (currently LFP), Nickel/Manganese based, and High Nickel. LFP is medium range. Nickel/Manganese he categorized as Medium + and stated that in pack state they are about 50% better than Iron based. High nickel he stated is for Long Range and is intended for CT and Semi.
6. I don't remember the effects of the Anode materials, but if I remember correctly they were a smaller part of the overall improvement. The possible silicon anode will both improve the battery and make a huge difference in environmental impact of the battery packs.
For a consumer this is poorer choice, especially when the car is over 8 years old. The worts part is that battery pack in practice not repairable, and thus the cost changing a battery will be enormous.
With all of that, you never discussed the performance number that actually MATTERS: How much is it COSTING Tesla to make this battery pack on a per unit basis? If it is equivalent to existing technology, but massively cheaper and more scalable, it's still a win on a business level. Conversely, how much does the battery cost when it's R&D cycle is amortized in?
Nice aspirations, but I expected it to be years before the 4680 would surpass the previous battery formats. Never buy the bleeding edge, latest and greatest hyped product. By the proven package and wait a couple of years on the new product introductions. Maybe a new paint process would be good to try, but the core of the car needs to be solid, tried and true.
FSD is much more hyped! In that environment, engineers who refuse to hype would be push out!
"Be not the first by which the new is tried, nor yet the last to lay the old aside."
The 4680 was always primarily meant to increase speed of production and decrease cost and charging time/degradation; the increased energy density was a side-benefit.
@@monad_tcp I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you mean on either point.
For a second I thought he was going to sau "Are you tired of drinking the same Kool Aid every day"? 😂
Thanks for boldly splashing cool water on an overheated Elon fan club, encouraging humility and clear eyed analysis without killing the expectation of continued success.
Well said. Elon has been hyping a lot of stuffs in the last 3 years.
They NEVER promised 30% longer range. It is 5x the size and 5x the energy. He promised NOTHING. The 6x likely refers to the ability to drain and charge them 16% faster. Everything else was likely a cost savings because the cost of Lithium and Cobalt are through the roof. Elon posted recently it was $101 per KW. That is $8,181 for batteries alone. This is not including the cooling and heating or the case or any of the sensors and electronics. The replacement cost of a 50kw Model 3 battery is around $13500 with $1000 labor or $14,500 total. This likely includes 2-4 thousand in markups. Now from what I have heard this version of the Model Y came with a $2000 reduction in price. So if it does charge a little faster and costs $2000 less I would say he hit his goals.
This Video Sucks
Well put
At battery day Tesla did promise longer range, just go back and watch it, it is right here on TH-cam. Musk keeps adjusting his promises, and the breaking of promises over time are pretty wild. Where is FSD, how many times has the Semi, Cybertruck and Roadster been delayed? Musk cannot be trusted, but at least he sets ambitious goals.
@@TheEbbemonster My new Model S has a 400 mile Range! The model 3 Long Range is Just Fine! Stop having a hissy fit. You try to do as much as Elon Musk does you little crybaby go change your pamper and stop whining. You are absolutely pathetic.
The main point is: you need 1/5th of production steps for 1 kWh of 4680 compared to the 2170 due to its 5x larger capacity. This reduces cost by a lot and increases throughput af.
The machines will be slightly bigger, but throughput is 5x.
Every (!) competent battery manufacturer in the field switches to 4680 right now, due to very good reasons. It happens all over.
Concerning the energy density: it will explode as soon as Tesla uses silicone rich anodes inside. But this will be absolutely unnecessary for the success of the 4680 cell.
Why would you need 1/5th of the production steps just because its bigger? Thats just wrong.
@@wizzyno1566
One 4680 cell has the same energy capacity as five 2170 cells. So: If you use 2170 cells in your battery, you have to produce 5 cans, 5 lids, 5 everything. You have to roll 5 jellys, fill 5 cans, weld 5, close 5 and test 5.
KWh-Wise you reduce the production steps to 1/5th! And most of these steps will still take the same time. Testing 1 4680 cell takes the same time (about 1 day) as 5 2170, but you need 5 times more machines and parts and everything for it.
Concerning warehousing and automation it's a huge benefit to transport only 1 cell (means 1 pick) compared to 5 cells (5 picks = 5 robots)!
Concerning the automation producer it's a huge difference to produce a machine for 1000 cells per minute compared to 5000 cells per minute. One is possible the other not; it will result in 5 times the machines and also to almost 5 times the footprint of the machines.
According to Elon at battery day you get a reduction in manufacturing cost, a smaller footprint of the battery production area, and lower capital expense to build the production line. Those add up to close to a 30%-50% reduction in cost to manufacture. The manufacturing aspect would be a home run, even if it is producing a slightly less efficient product. As it is, we've also only seen the LFP version of the 4680, which is the base model. Next level up is Ni/Mn that is supposed to be a 50% improvement over Iron based.
CATL and BYD spends the most money in battery research and so they are the leaders, I don't see that changing any time soon.
Yeah that’s not how that works lmao. It’s not that simple.
The issue seems to be a chemistry one. Didn't hear about dry battery chemistry in this vid or tabless design. I thought the 4680 was tabless, so my thinking is the problem is with the dry chemistry and the energy density this technique produces. Could be it takes less space, produces less chemical waste, but isn't as efficient.
My understanding is that the issue is that they cannot yet produce 4680’s with the dry process and have to use the wet process so they are not yet able to reduce the cost of these 4680’s to the extent they desire.
I’m gambling on a MY 4680. Maybe I’ll create a channel and review my ownership experience with this new battery 🙈
Thank you for being good And honest. Idk with everyone else but I Greatly appreciate it
Like you, I appreciate not just the reporting, but also the tone. Nobody's being personally attacked, just expectation management. "Can we all just get over ourselves?" (Us): Um, okay Dad, ur right. "Okay kids, carryon."
Expecting timeliness from Tesla is like believing that guy on the side of the road with the "End is near" sign! LOL!
It's also worth remembering that the past few years have been insane and unpredictable. Tesla always over promises but they are doing well rolling with the punches
The main thing that the 4680 batteries are missing that is really hurting their energy density is the complete lack of silicon. As far as speed of production goes, the main thing that is still slowing them down is the dry battery electrode technology that they haven't perfected for large scale production yet. Once they solve that, and they add silicon into the battery, I think that is when we will see the 4680 fulfill all the promises we got at battery Day
There is downsides to adding silicon to this chemistry. Elon, knows what he is doing, give him the time and benefit of the doubt.
@@richb2229 I am trusting Elon. That was the point of my comment. The 4680 will do everything they said it would. It's just taking a little longer than he predicted.
I would have preferred Lithium Iron Phosphate, while waiting for the new Nickel Silicon. Ultimately graphene is the way to go in the long run.
The 4680 is of lifepo4 ? If so, they should cycle at least three times that of regular lithium ion chemisty and be very safe from starting on fire. But they leg behind in energy dencity, though that has continued to increase.
Hello Tesla Space; I just fininished watching this two month old video, and I am struck by how much new information has come forth on this topic in the last two months. You have recent Testla investor day reports and some recent comments by Munro and Associates on their tour of the Austin Gigafactory with its new dry cathode production technique which is in full operations mode. How about an update of this video to see whether Tesla has turned the corner on the 4680 issues summarized as "disappointing" in this piece. Thanks in advance!
At the Battery Day event two years ago, Elon DID say the benefits of the 4680 battery would be implemented incrementally over the period of the next year and a half to three years. So, two years in, cars with 4680 cells and structural battery packs are gong to customers. The tab-less cell is a reality. Now to tweak the cell chemistry. I love re-watching Elon from years ago and seeing which of his visions have become reality and which are still dreams.
Great video. BTW, what kind of espresso prep do you do?
The technology is there , it should be an excellent battery and I feel it's more a software and systems issue then a component issue. I work for Mercedes Benz and we spent nearly a week digging into this technology at the north American HQ and we all agreed this battery can be revolutionary.
Elon invented a new battery package, then put old battery chemistry in it.
I think it's all about production of batteries for Tesla to actually realize the true potential of the 4680 cells format and battery. Once Tesla hit the target production goal then you will see the promised range increase from their battery noted in battery day. You need to go back and dig through the data for the dry electrode coming from Maxwell technology to really see what the future holds for the Tesla battery which is 300 WH/KG demonstrated with path to 500 WH/KG that would be the next generation and future battery path for Tesla.
The announcement was not just the new size, but changed to make manufacturing much more efficient, such as dry battery electrode. That new process was expected to take some time though. Then it will be optimized over more time.
BTW, why keep comparing the Tesla guidance for all batteries produced to how much 4680 production there was?
I was hoping by 2023 there would be a reasonably priced 500 mi EV which was probably going to be Tesla. Having a 2-year worldwide pandemic was probably the major factor impeding this.
I absolutely love your videos. A lot of hard work and clearly not just a Tesla shill.
Elon doesn't seem to be a fan of super long range. He's stated that he doesn't think people need it. I think the CT will be our best shot since it requires that much range to be able to get "normal" range while towing.
I could be completely wrong though.
Give it time. Ramping is not easy. The potential is there.
Excellent analysis. I subscribed immediately. The ads are too long however.
Im trying to decide between a 2022 Model Y long range and a 2023 Model Y 4680 and nervous about the new technology. While the lower range is not a deal-breaker, the old battery has a proven track record. Which would you go with and why?
I wanted the 4680 batteries in our new MY but our car delivered much quicker than anticipated. In the end, I’m happy after hearing of the 4680 issues. We now have over 14K miles on it with zero issues.
the lifespan is unknown only rumour to be longer. well with next gen cells at least.. my question is WHY havent they release the lifespan info ? is it TOO GOOD? or same or worse??
This is so funny. You need one of these videos for pretty much every single Telsa announcement. Hype, delay, disappointment, sigh, OK, it's sort of useable I guess.
So I am ready to order a Model Y today. I've watched so many videos and read so many articles. I'm to the point of research exhaustion. If the 4680 was truly just being software limited and at some point in the near future it would gain range, that would be spectacular. After watching this video it sounds highly unlikely. It sounds like I should just buy the long range with the older battery, as it is proven. The price difference is minimal to me. Is there any reason to buy the standard range at this point?
This video is ten minutes longer than it needs to be and I'm excluding the time consumed by the coffee ad.
This article is premature. Let’s revisit it in 1-2 years.
@Derpy1969 here we are. Production is ramping up. Still a long way to to go though.
That battery looks good for preventing overheating. What about overcooling?
Since tab-less conducts heat away faster, outside cooler temperatures can attack the water in the electrolyte faster.
From my point of view, it needs stored thermal energy and thermal conductivity that can be switched on/off as needed.
A few goals I see are to increase the Btu/Kg stored while improving Btu/Sec transferred and decreasing the Watts consumed/Btu stored.
It's not that the 4680 dumps heat faster but that it generates less heat.
However the overcooling problem in the winter would be worse with 4680 batteries. It takes a 2170 pack about an hour to warm up in arctic temps...
@@phenogefrom my point of view, It generates less heat because it can dump it faster (higher thermal conductivity). There is less of a pinch point, thermally because of the tab-less design. Likewise in my trade, the electrical industry, I have to choose a wire size to handle the ampacity (heat) outputted based on ambient conditions. However, when it comes to making the simplest effective way to keep battery temperatures in the sweet spot, where needed, it seems to be more challenging than it looks.
A thermal equivalent to a capacitor and coil to handle lead and lag temperatures and emergency hot and cold storage to match seasonal conditions.
@@gary.richardson That is slightly innaccurate.
A tabless design generates less heat because of lower resistance, increases cycle life because the localized heating spots are greatly reduced as well as other factors, and allows for faster heating and cooling because of increased thermal conductivity :)
I have been so over EV and battery announcements. Until the technology is in mass production, I ignore the announcements as companies enjoy over promising and under delivering
When you say "best" you must list the metric criteria. This video mentions a couple of criteria but fails to mention things like faster charging and that the 4680 battery pack replaces structural parts that results in total-car weight savings. For the 4680 Model Y, Tesla made more than one change at a time. Therefore, this video is comparing apples to oranges.
Also, any time someone states what they think will happen in the future, they should be seen as making aspirations, not promises. Otherwise, they could just buy lottery tickets and call it a day.
Why is it expected that the bigger batteries the worse the density? Your overheads go down as your cell gets bigger, meaning more active material:structure material ratio.
Mercedes EQXX has solid state batteries by ProLogium. One single charge goes up to 1150 km, and it's lighter and smaller. News will come in early April.. This is the breakthrough we are waiting for. Then Tesla is doomed when everyone else except Tesla is investing their money in solid state 🔋
Solid state is not happening now and no one knows when it will become available. So Mercedes and whomever HAVE NOTHING THAT IS SOLID STATE. So this poster is another FUDSTer. They are a DIME A DOZEN. Who is paying. you , shill fudster?
Solid state battery is an overhyped myth that has seriuous disadvantages.
Love your videos... well thought out and delivered in a way even I can understand. It always takes some time developing a new product and production methods. It may take a little longer but Musk has a pretty good track record. By the way, thanks for not using misleading headlines. Lead On Elon!
lmao lets see musk defy the laws of physics. bro wake up . just cos Elon said something , doesnt mean its true. Your bud here is laying it out here for you in a safe space yet the cope is strong. Hopes and dreams dont improve battery chem. New manufacturing methods DO NOT improve battery chem. This is just an optimisation game and at this point , but with 2 years delay and predictably underwhelming performance, lets see how long it takes to catch up to existing tech batteries first before any hope of improvement is even considered.
I thought the major improvement to producing this type of battery was that it would double as a structural component of the car instead of being dead weight. Maybe they have thicker walls which makes the power/weight ratio look bad on paper. If it offsets more structural weight than the presumed inefficiency that it would be an advancement.
It turns out that it's the outer case of the batteries that is serving to replace a piece of sheet metal (the floorpan), not the actual shells of the battery cells themselves. It more-or-less saves a layer of sheet metal ... it's something, but it's not an enormous difference. One thing that is apparent with this construction is that the battery pack itself is absolutely not serviceable (e.g. to replace a single cell or group of cells) other than replacing the entire battery assembly.
Don't forget the reduced manufacturing cost, smaller footprint of the production unit (space is expensive), and reduced capital expense to build the production line. Even with no other benefit, these factors are absolutely huge to the bottom line.
@@nerothe Tesla's "structural battery" the way I see it, saves the top stamping/molding of the battery case - that's it. The floor pan (and seat tracks etc) now becomes the top of the battery case, thus saving one layer in the structure. "A good thing" - structurally, yes; ease-of-repair, no (but the original manufacturer doesn't care). In the grand scheme of things, the piece that it's saving, while physically a large piece of sheet metal/plastic, is a small part of the overall body. As a vehicle owner, I'd rather have a battery assembly module that can be dropped out more-or-less on its own without having to tear apart the interior of the car ...
It is a terrible design. Can't repair, can't easily recycle. As usual, just more of Elon's hype. Be very, very skeptical of any promises Elon makes.
Also, why would a manufacturer begin using a new, unproven, battery technology that doesn't even reach current performance or production levels?
@@bikeaddictbp I would like to be able to easily replace the battery in my IPhone, but I wouldn’t settle for an inferior phone with less water resistance. Plus imagine DIY’ers trying to get into a battery pack with residual charge.
Just to clarify, the Ultium is not « just an off the shelf » battery chemistry. I think it is the only NMCA battery on the market. NMCA has the same energy density as NMC but it solves one of the main weaknesses of NMC: relatively low number of charge cycle before degradation.
Basically il combines the energy density of NMC battery with LFP charge cycle endurance.
If you don't change the battery anode and cathode chemistry chemistry, you don't change the specific energy, energy density, and specific power. Changing the battery size format does not move these parameters. All the larger size format buys you is a more difficult cooling problem. The larger format size might be less costly but with the recovery of the engineering engineering and production equipment costs won't let you see that for a few years. And that last statement assumes that the yield between the two formats is the same. One final comment: yield is a function of the electrode area. That usually means a larger battery has a lower yield.
One should know that the Gartner hype cycle does not mean that all products/ideas/ .... will come to the "plateau of productivity", some gets stuck in the "through of disillusionment" and then slowly fades away.
Great visualization
@7:18 Should be Dual, not Duel. The motors work together, rather than competing against each other to see who's the best motor. 🤣
Battery production like car production would suffer from a diminishing return the higher the number of batteries and cars.
A doubling might cause a quadrupling of effort and doubling again might need 10 x more effort to achieve this doubling of output.
Great video. Thank you. There are however two side effect benefits to using the 4680. For one it is supposed to be an intergal part of the chassis stiffness therefore saving weight on the vehicle (and god knows that weight is the #1 ennemy of EVs) and second it is also supposed to charge way faster than smaller celles precisely because of the many tabs instead of just 2 on a traditional cell. These 2 features should normally be visible from the first commercial grade generation of 4680s.
I would also think the tabless electrode would result in an improvement in cycle life, since the power path is distributed across the roll rather than up thru the single tab, resulting in dendrite creation that is more distributed across the cell.
Does any one here know if the Model Y weight dropped after the intro of the 4680
@@DamBusters theyre about the same
@@DamBusters no it did not. It weighs slightly more than a long range model Y.
Thanks. I've been wondering what happened with this.
Has anyone compared the cost of making 4680 to 2170 and 18650 in terms of per kg? Also has anyone compared the cost of assembly 4680 to 2170 and 18650 (less connections)? Also comparing structural strength of the three types of batteries in terms of battery packages (related to safety, explosions, etc...). If 4680 improved on those three comparison, it would be an improvement. It would be interesting to look at those three comparisons as well. Cost factor, assembly factor, and safety factor are important in car making business.
Well, TSLA is my largest holding. And I’m not planning on selling any until I have to pay for my Cybertruck!
Elon kept playing down the need for a longer range in Tesla's cars. What you discovered is the reason why. Elon knew all along there was no advantage to the 4680 battery except maybe cheaper to produce in the end.
Your absolutely right. There was never advantage for the customers. And Elon did play down range. The only plus is for Tesla, its cheaper to build. Don't know where the producer of the video got 30 percent longer range. That was never said.
You can plot a learning curve base on production at the start of the year Vs where they are now. Target was 10x less space & 5x faster production rate. If you get halve way there in the next 18 months but want to ramp up….you need more space & more equipment. This maybe the main reason they Moved Berlin equipment to Texas (Vs taking advantage of IRA credits). Tesla does control the build on the equipment…s/be excellerating.
Lovely video! Thank you!
So how many ah or mah is this battery supposed to have,? By my calculations if it's five times the capacity it would be around 25 amp hour ? Per cell
Hopefully by 2025 Tesla will have all the kincks worked out of the 4680 to allow them to deliver on their promises. I'll definitely be slowing my expectations on both the 4680 and FSD. Niether one is even close to any of the hype Elon put out! But still, Elon will always get high marks from me across the board for being lite-years ahead of everybody else, and motivating and inspiring us all to continue to strive to be better and do better, and that's all evolution requires!
The 4680's will be here sooner than the Cybertruck, LOL!
I like how they crammed 5 times more energy into something that has about 5 times more volume and weight.
🤣
The goal is faster manufacturing, it can be made in the same energy and time that only one small battery can be made ,so you have five times the energy with only one effort at manufacturing Einstein.
@@salvalooez2249 Einstein E=MC^(faster manufacturing)
Yeah I thought I was the only one to notice that, which means just 6 of one, a half a dozen of another.
🤣😂😂
Maybe if you would have talked about charging capacity and times . Maybe if you would have talked about it being a wall battery or a megapack battery.
It is Elon's job to be optimistic. It helps everyone who works on the project work harder to meet expectations. Had he said 5-15 years we might be waiting for the first cell. When Elon says anything it is always tagged as a promise because breaking a promise has so so much more impact then not meeting ones expectations.
Perhaps... it is because I am not frequently here, but my compliments to the writer of this episode👏👏👏💫... keep writing episodes like this and the masses will be better educated🙌
Of course, remember not to overDo it all🥸... The older guys have been doing that, and now we do not trust them enough.
Kudos to y'all
Sorry to nitpick... At time marker 4:49 (during your sponsor commercial), you show Mind Tonic EXPRESSO on your slide instead of ESPRESSO. Your sponsor may not like you making that mistake.
Very good summary
Ho-hum at first I was a little bit disappointed in your video, then you started to come around to where my thoughts have been since day one. This is true Elon style the 4680 is only beginning its development it will eventually achieve what Elon stated in the first place. The problem with most people is that they do not subscribe to the long-term vision that Tesla has. Please be patient you will be rewarded in due time.
Dont trust J.B. He does not know what is wrong whats right GREEN ENvironment a big Garbage idea Buffalos and Cows farts produce more harm than other man made stuff like petrol cars hahahhh
SpaceX failed 3 times and losers were complaining but Elon gathered his team of winners and told them we learn from every mistake we make and we get better and we can make it happen. He spoke like an Alpha and made it happen. I know that in this woke society we are living they hate this term but it exists. Alphas get hit and move forward stronger, the progress is there. The same with FSD losers say we are not making progress but the ridle will be solved at the end and we can see the progress with every beta version released
Doesn't really inspire much confidence when the CEO can't behave himself online...
@@maximusasauluk7359 indeed but he is what he is, we can either believe in him or stay far away
@@maximusasauluk7359 that’s your perception. Exposing collusion and corruption of big tech, big pharma, governments and their agencies is viewed by others as a valuable service.
It's difficult to understand why 21700 hasn't leap-frogged over the 18650 to become the "standard" cylindrical 'flashlight' lithium cell. For just 3mm increase in diameter (1.5mm radius), and 5mm increase in length, a quality 21700 can safely and reliably deliver *_around_* 40% more Ah capacity than an quality 18650.
Also, if one decides to take advantage of the following feature, using a 21700 cell in the same application can have the ADDED *major* benefit of allowing one to put LESS stress on the cell by charging to the same mAh as one would have charged the 18650 cell capable of the same capacity. Remember that this is for an almost negligible increase in size and weight and in return you get a lithium cell that has a much longer lifetime and significantly more recharge cycles.
For example, charging a 5,000mAh 21700 cell to _only_ 3,500mAh puts a LOT less stress on the 21700 cell than when charging a 3,500mAh 18650 cell to the same 3,500mAh. Thus, for the exact same amount of total per-use usage (e.g. let's say one typically used 3,000mAh of that 3,500mAh each time the cell is charged) the 21700 cell will have a MUCH, MUCH longer lifetime and have more recharging cycles to end-of-life than the 18650 cell, when charging both cells to 3500mAh. One could potentially get almost twice the number of recharges out of the 21700 cell than from out of the 18650 cell under the same charge and usage scenarios...all because one is putting far less electrochemical stress on the 21700 cell during charging and storage.
It's also much healthier for lithium-ion cells to be stored long-term at about 70% of a cell's full charge state than to be stored at a 100% of full charge state (see _batteryuniversity_ website). Charging a 5,000mAh 3.7 li-ion 21700 cell to only 3,500mAh meets that condition. To charge to the same 70% for a 3,500mAh 18650 cell, one would charge it to only 2,450mAh. Thus, if you had to use cells straight from storage, you'd get about 40% more available energy out of a stored 21700 cell (3,500mAh) than a stored 18650 cell (2,450mAh)...which could be key during an emergency situation when you don't have time to "top-off" the cell before using it.
Very nice video! I hope you are right and that we are going to rise up eventually. I guess we just have to hope that Elon won’t buy another Twitter and drive the stock price of Tesla so low that they don’t have enough money to Indore this not so good bit.
The stock price has nothing to do with how well the company can endure this not so good bit. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
@@wizzyno1566
I beg to differ. If the stock price continues to sync, it will be much more difficult for Tesla to raise funds. Also, tesla employees are probably given stock options, and if those options are underwater (i.e., worthless.), then your motivation to work hard and trade improve the vehicles, me slip with disasters results.
Yes time to create software to optimize the 4680 software.Tesla need more good software engineers but they are very hard to find as Elon said.
How would that work. Software has nothing to do with battery capacity.
@@TheHanutaXD it wouldn't work.
Very well said.
Its in the official numbers of Tesla that the energy density of the 4680s is lower than of the 2170s. Because Tesla said its 5x more Energy in a 5.5x bigger Battery. And with 6x more power they are on par with the pouch Cells, thanks to the tabless design. And the 16% more range (not 30%) - I think you can put more Energy in a block of cells thanks to the bigger cells. Tesla has told you so. Why have people expected something different? The only problem they have is to decrease costs because of problems in mass production. I think they will make it, but not now.
In a standard battery pack car if a module fails they can rebuild it. What happens in a structural pack car when a single cell fails? Throw the whole car away? From Munro’s tear down, it appears impossible to repair.
I highly expect even the conventional pack would be dismantled/recycled/full-replaced, not repaired, due to the complexity/danger of swapping new cells into existing partially charged pack. Also see my other comment regarding the flaw in the energy density calc he describes, due to not taking into account less outside of battery structural mass required.
I believe all the cells are individually fused and if 1 goes bad it's just turned off from the rest of the pack.
@@1Quamish Right, but it is so far from trivial to replace a cell. I imagine they replace the whole pack and recycle the survivors, just my estimation based on 25 years of design engineering.
@@1Quamish I say this because of such things as inrush current, deadly in powerful lithium batteries, you can look it up. I'm not sure it's economically feasible to replace a cell in a pack, I think the packs just are reliable and work for 500,000 miles or so and would replace the whole pack, though I'm realistically objective and not claiming it for sure.
@@jaya8352 I don't think you have to replace a cell or two or ten in a pack if their bad. I believe the pack still functions within parameters of voltage and or is compensated for with BMS software. These packs are proven robust and I would think that individual cell failure in a 7 thousand cell pack would have to be accounted for.
Why rolling up into a cylinder? BYD has the blade batteries. If your battery pack is rectangular, why making the batteries cylinder shape? Isn't that less efficient? I am not a battery expert. Just one of my questions. I mean I don't see (or understand) why/what exactly makes the 4860 a much superior car battery.
IMHO rolling is continuous and is the fastest manufacturing technique (rather than folding, which has to occur for non-cylindrical shapes) and is the more efficient manufacturing process. But it is clearly slightly less efficient for pack density as there is space around the cylinders when packed that cuboid shapes, for example, do not have.
I'm pretty sure that the companies that are building pouch cells, also have their automation quite well sorted out by now. Nobody is doing this with manual labour!
@@bikeaddictbp you're another "im cleverer than everyone at Tesla" fool.
It is cheaper, thats all!
One of the main advantages of the 4680 is as a structural pack and power density . It wins hands down there . Over time they will tweak it to have a great energy density at least equivalent to anything else they produce and most likely it will be the cell that most rnd will go into as it forms the nxt gen of manufacturing techniques !
Power density has not increased if you measured it, it actually decreased until battery is properly optimized
Doesn't matter. Tesla will buy all the batteries they can get their hands on. Solid state batteries could hit scale and they'd buy them too.
Didn't GM just say they are ditching the prismatic packs and will be going with cylindrical in the future?
Will this still be called Ultium?
So the chemistry of the 4680 can still be improved and that is what we are waiting on the catch up.
But they will sell the improved chemistry as a new type of cell once other manufacturers improve their cells. This cell is now established improving it would not benefit them at the moment.
The chemistry of any of these cells is subject to improvement, regardless of the size of the cell (18650 vs 21700 vs 4680). They're all constructed as jelly-rolls (cylindrical) or layers (pouch) of "whatever cell chemistry you happen to be using". If someone finds a new battery composition that could improve any of these, the same improvement could be done to others.
@@bikeaddictbp Well that being the case Do you think they are moving forward to improve the older cells or the newer ones with the structural pack?
@@scamchan Work is ongoing throughout the industry. I have no knowledge of whether Tesla plans to go all-in on 4680, but it doesn't matter. It's the stuff that makes up the jelly-roll that matters, not so much its particular dimensions.
I think the point of the 4680 battery is more on manufacturing than performance. Although performance is in the works. It's widely know the hindering aspect of electrification is availability of batteries. Tesla is actually changing the manufacturing technology of batteries to overcome this. They absolutely will get it close to what was advertised.
Nice conclusions on the topic.
"Duel" motor ... there's your problem right there. The motors are fighting each other ...
Tesla acquired SilLion and Springpower around november 2021 to advance and upgrade the anode and cathode for their new 4680 battery cell technology. Tesla already has the capability to build the 4680 battery with a 30% increase in energy density but they dont need to release this technology yet until they need to compete in 2 or 3 years time. Currently, its pointless to increase the cost of the vehicle and complicated production wise to add to the cost for the premium A version of the battery and then charge customers more for it, plus it gives the competition an advantage by releasing a benchmark standard for them to all beat. I am pretty sure Teslas battery engineers have already unlocked more than 30% increase in energy density for the 4680 battery cell which can easily be scaled for mass production within their existing battery production factories.
I honestly think Tesla has come quite a long way in a relatively short timeframe.
Regarding the 4680. I'm not sure you addressed its full attributes two of which are charging time & rate of discharge which stand out in the energy storage industry. I apologize if you did. Considering the resource investment in terms of bringing a vertically integrated new component to bear that is completely self-contained within Tesla, the exception being raw materials and I would mention that is also being addressed as we speak, is quite the accomplishment for a relatively young company.
So far I'm not disappointed in Tesla as much as I am with all of the postings which have a hyperbolic tendency in their reports/updates.
Maybe someone could explain how 5x more power only gets you 16% more range. Are they trying to keep up with the glacial speed of the Prius innovation and range or the Leaf?
Sombody who knows about batteries told me that Tesla could greatly improve the energy density of the 4680's by adding more sillicone, but it would ensure a shorter life cycle of the pack! I dont think that would stop other car companies, they would probably have gone there if they could. I rather wait till they get it right.
Thanks!
Maybe one can mix two different cylindrical cells to achieve higher packing efficiency in the future.
Energy density has limits , there is not much higher you can get , upper theoretical level of lithium batteries is still only 10% of gas or diesel per weight unit , and thats with doubling the current energy density ... even that needs new materials as electrolytes, separators, current collectors, and packaging .
I suspect that would create very complex energy management issues...
Seems most expectations are set @ now! Same way with many investors. Patience brings the stronger rewards. Gratification is not often instantaneous ~
what about the QILIN Batteries from CATL? Arent they the best performing at the moment?
Does anyone know what the longevity of this new battery cell is? The previous chemistry was good for 100k miles right?
Current battery packs are guaranteed for 8 years or 200,000 miles.
2500+ charge cycles X range per charge of 200 miles + would mean 500,000 miles or so I believe...
I noticed that 2170 used in M3 degrades faster than 18650 used in MS.
Likely quite a bit better.
I think EV makers also need to make battery packs easier to test and repair to lower costs.
This is often the outcome you get when trying to reinvent the wheel.
During the battery day Tesla mentioned a number of improvements. One is the silicon usage. This has not happened.
Why is it that every time tesla announces something ground breaking it just turns out to be average at launch. Tesla creates good products but they hype them up like the world has never seen something comparable.
Ha ha, so true, Tesla Daily said that they could unlock the real potential of the new batteries via a software update 😂😂😂
Classic battery hype. Over promise and under deliver. 4680, the battery from heaven, not so fast.
Thanks and congrats on this video, it is refreshing to see some reality check inside the (sometimes crazy) hype surrounding Tesla.
Personally, I don´t agree with the part of the video that "faults" the community for simply believing what Elon said. I very much agree that people need to do a bit more of keeping feet on the ground, but how is someone supposed to conceive that one of the most successful CEOs (and supposedly an expert on the matter) can get it so terribly wrong? As some have said in this comments section, Elon and time estimations is a running joke.
In my opinion, though, this video is guilty of doing the very same thing it tries to correct. First it acknowledges overhyping something, then it rationalizes it somehow, but then sort of overhypes it again, assuming the 4680 will 100% deliver on the promise , only a bit later than expected, AND that the competition are pretty much staring at the wall, watching paint dry. Again, this overhypes Tesla potential with no solid foundation, because if we accept Tesla will spend years before they can fully get the 4680 potential, to assume the rest are simply going to wait and see how that happens... I don´t think so.
At this point, specially seeing how many setbacks each and every player in the battery innovation game is facing, I think we need to really keep expectations realistic. Munro himself has acknowledged that if Toyota (or anyone else) gets solid state battery right, that would be a major blow for Tesla. I think the point is, we shouldn´t try to read too much into this. Any electric car one can buy today and in following years, Tesla or otherwise, are fairly balanced in what they offer. Some are better, some are worse, but there is no real game changer and I think it will stay that way moving forward. People simply should buy whatever it is they like and enjoy it, no need to fanboy or troll.
LFP battery efficiency progress is much more important than the ternary battery.
Well, i don’t think people will be happy with an inferior battery in their structural battery pack…so perhaps they have been working in the back ground to live up to the range performance…
Most people wont give a shit about whats in the battery pack, just like they dont care about crankshaft material or number of valves in an ICE engine. All they will care about is car range and charging speed.
Tesla rules of thumb:
1. Any time estimate should be multiplied by at least 4
2. Any technological advancment claim should be divided by 4.
That seems unduly pessimistic.
@@eyesuckle Well.... jump in your $30k Robotaxi and I will jump in my Cybertruck and we can meet up at the Hyperloop station to discuss the details.
@@eyesuckle truly so. Especially considering all the people living on Mars.