Additional Notes on Variables: 1) (+) The Model 3 has a $28,000 production cost. This means Tesla could save more than what's indicated here. 2) (-/+) Tesla could keep the the battery and motors the same size. This would mean lower cost savings. However, the customer would still benefit from longer range, better MPGe, and acceleration. Thanks for your support!
Re: Steel vs Pressed AL. Is the AL ends intended to be sacrificial crush zones, so damage pressures will minimally intrude beyond the immediate ends being crashed upon? If so, will body shops be provided pressed AL "clips" by which they can quickly impart repairs vs steel?
I feel that this video understates the case. 1) Casting makes it easier to form complex shapes, with complex, deep embossed / raised ridges on any number of axes at once (as can be easily seen in the geometry of the casting). This increases the net thickness of the piece, and thus its stiffness. 2) Casting makes it easier to preform bolt holes, wiring mounts, and any number of fittings that would require extra machining or parts with conventional manufacture. 3) Apart from price, casting reduces the part and joint count. Each joint is a new opportunity for problems to emerge such as noise, improper alignment, bad welds, etc - you just get in general a better vehicle if you can keep the part count down. One could also mention that UHSS is famously a pain to work with compared to HSS and esp. mild steel.
Jordan, this is top notch material science engineering analysis. It boggles my mind that you don't have a traditional engineering degree. You clearly are a super bright and capable guy! I'm surprised Tesla hasn't tried snatching you up 😉
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 I respectfully disagree! Performing material analysis investigation, selection, and especially highlighting the magnesium strength & weight analogue study (which was then compared to aluminum), was some good engineering sleuthing. To put that all into a condensed and easy to understand presentation is where Jordan's top-notch work really shined.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 You’re speaking too soon. Tesla is already at nearly a million per year vehicle manufacturing run rate with just the two vehicle factories that it has, and the Shanghai Gigafactory hasn’t reached its peak output. Also the Fremont Factory hasn’t fully ramped the new Model S production line or even started delivering the new Model X which typically outsells the Model S. The Berlin Gigafactory is larger and more advanced than the highly efficient Shanghai Gigafactory which will improve the final product while simultaneously decreasing cost for Tesla’s European customers. Then there’s the Austin, Texas Gigafactory which is even bigger than Berlin and according to Elon will be used to test the cutting edge of Tesla’s manufacturing techniques so even more advanced than Berlin. Tesla is forecasting a 20 million a year vehicle manufacturing rate by 2030 and I believe them. They’ve got practically unlimited cash and have shown that they can build two Gigafactory simultaneously in about a year for a cost of just ~$400 million each. Contrast that with VW’s Tennessee EV plant expansion/conversion that costs $800 million or GM’s $2.2 billion dollar EV factory also in Tennessee, and you’ll start to understand Tesla’s huge capital efficiency lead.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 It's not small at all. You should not count how many cars the brand put out. Count how many they can put out on their most advanced factories. OEM does 200k at most per factory per year. Giga Shanghai's new Production Rate is 450k per year.
For your consideration... min 5:50 an increase in thickness increases stiffness👍, but also increases deformation energy absorption 👍👍.....The required thickness of some body components is not dictated by the service loads (stiffness) , but by the crash safety requirements (energy absorption). A thicker aluminum part will require (absorb) more energy to deform/crumple than a thin steel part. This makes the thicker part better/cheaper/lighter for crash worthiness.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 I would say this is a misplaced priority. Protecting occupancies is more important than the battery. Given the stiffness of the battery, Tesla uses the battery to share loads in protecting occupancies.
@@quansun7633 Impact damage is a serious danger to humans, so is the explosion of a damaged lithium battery. Watch the hydraulic press channel vid where they crush a power bank 😳
I REALLY appreciate the detail and effort you put into these videos. I love learning about the reason why something is rather than just accepting that it is with a surface level overview. You are doing outstanding work and I am always excited to see your next video!
Elon has said his real technological advantage is in manufactring. A traditional car takes 22 hours for assembly, give or take an hour for what car/factory/brand you're looking at. I've seen tesla saying it takes 10, yes ten, hours to ass'l the 3/Y with gigacastings. So that's DOUBLE the production rate for the same size factory/workforce.
It's not only the throughput due to speed, less space is required for each production line as there are fewer steps, and a lot fewer robots. As the video says, there is an additional improvement in quality some defects, such as panel gaps, are only apparent further down the line. Improving the defect rate has a compound effect and makes the manufactuing more profitable.
Ten hours is not that fast... Nissan Sunderland can build a car from painted shell (coming into trim line) to start up in around 6 hours or so..might be quicker with no lunch break... Each work assignment is well under 1 minute turn round.. has been the most efficient in Europe for years.. Tesla seem to think what they do is fast...haha... No where near.. what they do is brag about what they do... Need to try comparing data... Oh hang on.. he daren't...
Speed or throughput are not good key numbers to compare. A factory that produces a car in half the time but costs three times as much to build and operate is not better. You need to break down speed and throughput into their associated costs. Both in capex and running cost. Again, using half the labour but spending twice the saved cost on electricity is no win.
There's another factor in play soon reducing costs of production. What to do with the main battery packs when they are no longer viable in a car. They are going back to the factories to be used as storage batteries linked to the factories own solar and wind farms. Nissan announced recently that they will be carbon neutral in the next ten years. Some going when you see the size of machines running. By reducing the third biggest cost of a car (1st being parts, 2nd being labour), the energy costs to make a car need to come down. These apply to all manufacturers.. something's they can't reduce such as labour costs but energy and parts they can control and can be ruthless. Suppliers tend to be moving nearer factories now, reducing costs of transportation and uncertainties in markets. Before covid most parts were made in very low wage countries... That's changing. The shortages of silicone chips has thrown another spanner in the works too... 90% of manufacturers are still on downtime working on and off as stocks arrive.. try buying a new car... Wait times are huge unless in stock. There's also another factor in play.. new upstart companies trying for their own slice of the cake... Market share has shuffled around a lot.. China being a huge player in the EV markets now... Consistency of quality for new companies... Can they keep it up...
@@terrybrown6057 google some...22 hours labor to build a car...remember the engine and transmission, seats and more arrive ready to assemble in the body.
Kinda related, but VW's chairman, Herbert Diess recently said that it takes Tesla 10 hours to make a model 3, but it takes 3 days to make a VW id.3. I assume he's talking about Giga Berlin and Al casting. He proposed tearing down some current plants and building back with more efficient plants. I think VW is getting the message, but other manufacturers....?
the problem is that it seems Diess is alone at Volkswagen trying to convince them. So much that he dares mention the "T" word directly. It takes guts. I hope he gets fired from Volkswagen and Tesla hires him!
@@Akira-nw4jl I think all traditional auto manufacturers are facing boardroom struggles. IMO, Toyota is loosing the battle, BMW is on the fence while GM seems to be forging ahead. The recent sales numbers reported by Tesla are telling...they outsold BMW, Mercedes and Audi in the last quarter.
I don't know if it's already happened or not but Diess is facing a vote of no confidence at VW. These guys are still pretending it's 1995 and it will take Diess a miracle to survive inside a dinosaur 🙄
For clarification, at 5:47 he is talking about flexural stiffness which is proportionnal to the cross section, lever effect and material deformation which are all proportionnal to the sheet thickness, hence the cubic power.
Good design means very little of the sheet material should undergo significant bending stress. In practice this means you don't get that cubic relationship
@@EdFrench_uk Well, it's under compression so buckling is an issue. But I guess that the advantage of using aluminium is that you can use simpler shapes.
There's another cost:weight dynamic that is of increasing importance... the after sale cost of fueling/charging the vehicle increases with the weight of the vehicle. The old combustion industry didn't care, since that cost was born by the customer after they'd bought the car (the colatteral enviro cost being completely ignored for 100 years of combustion). Now with climate change driving the dynamic it becomes more important to factor in the impact of weight on the lifetime fueling requirements. Lighter total mass might eventually become more important than cheaper build and market price.
I’m not usually a fan of European regulations. However they have forced car makers to improve fuel consumption and safety of passengers and pedestrians. Tesla did not want to be excluded from that market so designed its cars to exceed EU regulations.
Great video, and some really great discussion is being had below. You have attracted some knowledgeable viewers to your channel with the quality of your content Jordan.
Great video. I’m a geological engineer but took a lot of material science courses (steel alloys, etc). Great high level laymen’s review and delivered better and in a more interesting way than in my courses haha
First time I've been served one of your videos. Every follow up question I think of gets answered 30 seconds later. Top notch material, thanks! And, subscribed!
Hey Jordan, great work as always! Just curious: does the costing and cost savings include labor costs? With 1 part replacing up to or around 100 parts, I would assume there is a large amount of savings in labor just in assemblage of all that.
this is the nicest presentation about cars and contemporary engineering that I`ve ever found. The decisive criteria compared in different models with credible numbers in the overall system. What a wonderful world where the quality of information seems to get better every day. For this one I`ll make an exception and share it in my local network of business people...
Just to say, Magnesium and Aluminum have a similar melting point, about half of steel. Because the casting machine is made of steel with a similar melting point, and the desired crystal structure of the steel may not survive casting, casting steel seems unlikely. If possible, it would take more energy to melt the steel and cool the casting machine.
Steel can not be used in die casting. The crystal structure devevelops during cooling the steel, and often further heat treatment. You typically need slow cooling, and cooling at the same rate everywhere in the part. Steel is just completely different to handle, and this method does not work.
Correct. Steel can be cast, but with extreme difficulty, and NOT in this kind of detail. Incidentally, magnesium is a lot easier to cast than aluminium still, with noticeably longer die lifetime. Melting temperature is just one of many factors.
@@pasticcinideliziosi1259 We have more than enough ice cars. But cars made of frozen water are new. Large ships have been build from ice, successfully.
The MVP the Limiting Factor provides IS the technical breakdown METRICS. The technical and the breakdown method are your bread and butter for delivering tasty metrics. Because your metric never does crossover into reductionism they enable value comparison. Its a brilliant undeniable claim you build from first principles without simply beginning from a general claim working backwards. Brilliant mind!
Any plans for videos on Aptera Motors? Love your videos, have you watched any videos from the Terran Space Academy Channel? It is similar to your channel, but he talks about rocket engines and aerospace!!
Wow. Really cool analysis. I remember manufacturing engineering questions in engineering economics classes I took where hypotheticals like this were worked through. Here is a real world example splendidly done. Outstanding video my friend.
The complexity and depth of analysis is amazing in this video. What I am most interested in is the fact that the concept/vision/imagination of this product and procedure came first and is the "Cause" while the analysis is all after the fact. This is how most if not all great advancements have been made throughout history. The root cause of everything in the physical world is the unseen spiritual world of consciousness. Elon Musk clearly has an understanding of developed intuition.
Yes aluminum cars also last so much longer. Without crashes in mind rust is almost solely responsible for cars needing to be scraped. Aluminum never rusts. It forms a small layer of oxide which is actually harder and more durable than normal aluminum. Aluminum parts are easily recyclable and have life spans of hundreds of year. A well maintained aluminum car without any steel could out live the owner. Especially electric cars. Less moving parts. Regardless of material gas engines will always die eventually because they break them themselves apart while in use. We could easily see cars lasting 20 30 50 even a hundred years with minimal maintenance. Carbon steel shouldn’t even exist anymore. It is one of the shity materials one could use. Regardless of what it’s properties are new a material which naturally and rapidly decomposes is useless. And the rust takes enormous amounts of energy and chemicals to recycle back into iron for making new steel. So much it’s not worth doing it. There is never, EVER a good reason to use carbon steel anymore for absolutely anything in todays world. There will always be materials better in every way that last longer and at similar or lower prices. The only reason it is used is stupidity and because if products die and need to be replaced it is profitable for manufacturers. I absolutely hate carbon steel. It is usually used in super expensive products that are disposable items because of carbon steel.
@jacobleeson4763 if you knew anyone in the trucking industry where they use aluminum frames on trailer bodies then you would know that aluminum will not rust but actually dissolve when exposed to salts
You rock! Best researched Tesla analysis out there. You deserve respect for building expertise while other Tesla TH-cam videos mainly discuss ideas we already understand.
Pretty decent analysis. Couple of refinements: 1. There is IMHO no universally-accepted definition of "high strength steel". So, be careful when comparing; 2. Magnesium is an oddity. Its USP's include high damping - ideal for dashboard support. Again, be careful what you compare... 3. Strength is easy to talk about until you look closer: e.g. fatigue strength and energy absorption potential are quite tricky to pin down. Keep up the good work.
I am looking forward to your next videos! Did I miss something about the difference in tooling-cost between Gigacasting and HSS? I also missed the difference in the materials in corrosion-prevention. HSS will also have to be treated against corrosion right? Keep up the good work! Future patreon out!
Cheers man. Corrosion will be covered when we cover the alloy. The tooling cost, energy, labour, treatment etc were all covered in the DOE and MIT estimates.
@@thelimitingfactor Thanks, just rewatched those parts. Another thing I didnt see: waste material in stamping seems nill, just reprocess, but for HSS - waste?
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 Nothing is certain but death and taxes, and playing the market is gambling by any measure. However, I can't think of a more certain bet today than this company. The next 4 years or so will reveal the answer, afterward will be building on the successful execution of Tesla's gameplan. No, not a lock, and there is a chance I may not wake up tomorrow, but I don't bet against Elon.
That video was 20 minutes long? I could've sworn it was five. Thanks for the deep dive! I didn't know anything about the whole aluminum vs. high-strength-steel price tradeoffs before now.
Speaking of advantages, you left out one of the biggies, literally orders of magnitude better QC on the panel gaps. Elon was serious about microns vs the current millimeters. Along with a brand new cutting edge paint shop, complaints about fit and finish will be history.
Complaints coming from customers are compared between manufacturers at 3 months of ownership (3MIS 3 Months In Service). This data is shared across manufacturers and QA evaluation data in house is compiled by each and published so manufacturers have an idea how they're doing. But... Tesla refuse to do this.... Why do you think that is? Customer satisfaction is more than just fit and finish...it's the complete ownership package.. how satisfied with the car are you... What issues did you have as warranty claims etc... Why don't Tesla publish their data? I would guess it's not upto scratch... If your good you'd make sure it was known... I worked 30yrs inspecting quality of new vehicles.. I've seen some Tesla's parked... Oh dear... There's some real bad panel fits out there... Not saying each manufacturer is perfect but bleating on that Tesla will be perfect is a pie in the sky... In real life getting a cars panels to fit properly usually requires manual bending somewhat to get it to fit. If you think that an assembly line WILL turn out perfect panel fit you know nothing of how cars are made, how cars are adjusted or how they are repaired to be ready for the customer from new. Go on a car plant tour... You'll learn something
@@terrybrown6057 Why should Tesla have to do as the legacy car manufacturers have traditionally done? Our 2 year old Model 3 is perfect, panel gaps and paint are as good as any car (confirmed by detailers), reliability has been 100%, and build quality is very near to perfect. The Tesla is MUCH better than any other new car we’ve owned, (and without counting, we have had a lot of new cars in the last 40 years.) The Tesla is just in a whole different league compared to all my previous ICE cars, which over the last 40 years includes European, American, Korean and Japanese built cars.
@@FutureSystem738 as I said... As a customer you would never know how the company as a whole is performing. Yea, you have a car are happy with..great . But the truth is in warranty claims... Why do you think Elon refuses to publish warranty claims? Everyone else does. There are good cars with every company... But even with your detailers they won't have access to engineering standards and what tolerances are allowed before a fault becomes unacceptable. For example a panel that is designed to be flush +/-1mm... Each manufacturer has different levels of tolerances allowed as to what is achievable to the drawings. And what is allowed to be shipped out the door. So anyone working outside of QA at the manufacturer will never know what is allowed to be good or not. Every part has tolerances from fit n finish to even allowance on how hot an LED should be on a switch... What I'm saying is pure quality data is compared from sources of customers fault feedback and offline fault detection and treatment.
Japanese motorcycle makers often use cast aluminium frame parts. They look good and stiff structures are easier to make a than using steel tubes or steel pressings. I can see Tesla using castings for door structures and for the car sides (A, B, C pillars plus roof and sill frames). These can be welded but today’s industrial adhesives could literally glue the car together.
Jordon, thanks for the great content. It would be interesting to see a comparison of repair costs after a collision. I imagine repairing a one piece cast aluminum frame assembly would be extremely difficult.
Thanks Jordan! Totally geeked out on your in-depth analysis. The knock-on effects are of wide ranging and long lasting benefits. Having worked as a Quality Engineer in manufacturing I cannot begin to tell you the tremendous cost benefits of do-it-once-and-done manufacturing process with the Giga Castings. By replacing 70 parts with just the rear castings in the Model Y will not only reduce manufacturing logistics cost and increase vehicle performances but increase the overall fit, form, function quality and durability of the vehicle. This will reduced after delivery servicing and increased customer satisfaction. This is the Holy Grail of manufacturing.
Nice work! There a whole area of Industrial engineering name OR, operational research, today with assembly simulation all this question can be answered, including all Capex and Opex, even what happens with cost fluctuations 😁
The lack of heat treatment in aluminum means better dimensional tolerances/repeatability vs steel. They may see this as a way to improve quality control in scale up.
My guess is that your analysis is a lot more comprehensive than that carried out by most vehicle companies. I think you got it right about the inertia of sunk costs and techniques effectively dictating the continued use of established materials. Most car companies will focus on specific areas of a vehicle rather than assess it holistically. Tesla only ventured into Giga castings because it was a way to simply the manufacturing process of the rear substructure that they had developed for the model 3 and model Y, the original being a dogs breakfast of a myriad of parts that were expensive to assemble. However a good idea applied in one area often lends itself to other areas and sets in motion new trains of thought. It is only a matter of time before the electric motor outer casings become integral with the subframes as a further step in reducing parts and simplifying processes both of which contribute directly to reducing manufacturing costs.
I couldn’t tell from the video so I’ll ask, you’re quoting a lot of metrics about aluminum but some of those properties could vary from what Tesla is using unless you’re using specific data from an analysis of Teslas materials? Sandy Munro mentioned they had very exotic alloys to give more of the properties they need. Any way to account for some of those specifics (if they’re available) if you didn’t already? Love the breakdown and detail, just wondering how much variance there may be from what tesla is actually using. Thanks for any feedback!
The resultant stiffness is the cube of the depth of a plate in bending but you also divide by the depth of the most extreme fiber when integrating it to get the resultant deflection meaning the best way to look at stiffness is by the square and not cube.
This video is very informative Jordan, I congratulate you. On aspect I am not sure you touched on is the higher rebate that automakers like Tesla may get if they sell the aluminum scrap, which is more worthy. Also, what is the circularity of the aluminum gigacasting? Do you think that this will drive use of aluminum sheet usage in other parts of the vehicle to feed and subsidize the gigacasting process?
It has been reported Tesla recently ordered a 12 ton gegacasting press, which will allow it to make a whole body casting, and 5,000 cars a day. My best guess is this won't/can't be used for larger vehicles like the Cycbertruck but can be used for their smaller $20k economy model hatch back. Worth checking into.
Another opportunity for economies of scale is the possibility to use the same casting for both front and rear. maybe that's how we ended up with rear wheel steering on the Cybertruck.
NO, gm is using the same BOF and suspension as Regular trucks , you can add Quad steer as Aftermarket option. not that hard to do. Question will be , how much Quad steer will CT get 10% or 15%.
You compare the cost per unit weight of steel versus aluminium. When you create stamped steel parts, there is a lot of waste steel that gets thrown away. When you create cast aluminium parts there is very little waste. Are you using the amount of steel (weight) that ended up in the vehicle, or the amount of steel that was purchased - in other words, do you need to include the cost of the steel that was thrown away.
@@terrybrown6057 I'm happy to hear that, but since the price that they get for the recycled cuts is less than the cost of new material, that difference would have to be included in the overall cost. Not sure if it significant, but it could be.
Yet another amazing video, Jordan! I just had one question, are we accounting for higher scrap rates (over 50%) for these kind of large aluminium castings or is Tesla avoiding that with the use of their special Al alloy material?
Thanks on the shootout and bravo for the perfect pronunciation. Regarding the video, I'm betting on Berlin to be 2M per year and Austin at least 3M once fully ramped.
Very in depth video.. now i know how advance tesla in manufacturing as elon said manufacturing will be tesla’s advantage in the future.. looking forward for the next video on this series. thank you.
First your videos and content are awesome. My comment intends to take nothing from that. I feel you have underestimated your emphasized savings. You made room for it but the number range in your conclusion is just very low. The plant space, labor, equipment, jigs, coatings, treatments and mechanical adjustments of the array of steel assembled into the body all add dramatically to cost. Labor and rework=more labor is king. I think the giga casting is a massive savings vs conventional builds. I offer this as an electrical engineer on a couch with an opinion in the hope that you can with your superpowers make it into more robust content at some point. Any detail is more that I have provided. Footnote: I grew four large successful manufacturing operations in my life with my opinions... Again love your work, patreon and huge fan...
Hi Eric! For sure! I was angling to underestimate. I'd also note that the MIT paper and the DOE work appeared to take into account the factors you mention above. That is, aluminum is a material just costs more, and even if gigacasting eliminates all production costs, it's about the same price as stamped aluminum. However! How many more cars is Tesla able to pump out of this line for lower capital cost? That is, I find it difficult to assess how much more quickly the lines ramp, how much higher quality they'll be, and how much that will suck money into Tesla's coffers 😀
@@thelimitingfactor I think Aluminum sheet does not talk to a cast part from a labor and square footage perspective. The large casting is not what those papers were thinking. It is not the material, it is the complexity and piece count. Labor and variance are Huge costs, they dwarf material in manufacturing. I get the underestimate part but I think you did such a good job you underrepresented the point significantly...
Jordan, could you make a video or videos on how to do the kind of stupendous extensive research you do and also how to present such complex matter so clearly ! Would appreciate it a lot !
What I can see in steel having a HUGE advantage is the cost and ease of repairing after a collision. Aluminum seems to be very expensive to repair and requires very specialized techniques.
Jordan, just a thought. In an accident the aluminium is probably harder but more easily fractured than the steel is. Instead of passing the impact through to the passengers the aluminium takes the brunt & gives way; ie crushes in the moulded areas. Steel at the battery frame is necessary for stiffer protection but would be harsher on those inside.
When it comes to nuanced analysis of complex material science and manufacturing cost systems Jordan is a super ninja 🥷 You just destroyed an MIT cost study with a few well reasoned analogs. Well done, grasshopper.
@10:23, stiffness is a function of moment of inertia, I, rotated about its principal axis times E, the modulus of elasticity. The symbol K is often used to represent stiffness. K = fn ( E, I). The value of I depends on its geometry. For a given geometry, the value of I is the same regardless of the material. However, K is different between a steel and aluminum part having the same geometry because E (steel) is greater the E(aluminum). The only way for an aluminum part to achieve the same stiffness as a steel part is to increase I, ie change of geometry of the part such as making it beefier. A beefier aluminum part would cost and weigh more, two factors not considered in the “Final Tally.”
Difficult making hollow section, if you're not using sand casting and hollow sections are usually good for moment of inertia, where you get both increased bending stiffness and increased structual stability. I also wonder if they need to add material places, that are not necessarily needed from a structual perspective in order to make the casting process work.
This video is so great. But it remains in my mind why your analysis doesn't include corrosion resistance as a consideration. The simplicity of EVs strike me as a reason to go for long life durable vehicles which retain value. I'm thinking aluminium is more corrosion resistant, but nice if you addressed it.
FYI the whole-body casting patent Tesla applied for a few years ago (15:20) was declined because multi-die castings are already a thing, and application to a full car body was not seen as sufficiently novel. Not that having a patent would determine whether they'd do it or not in the future -- they just don't want other people beating them to the patent and blocking it from being an option.
The giga-cast is cool. But I can't even afford to look at a Tesla. I think Ford solves the problem pretty well with the F 150. They use the same full frame design as always, and put the battery in the middle same as a Tesla. $32,000 after tax credit. Seats 5. 200 miles range. It looks like a truck. If $28,000 is the cost to make a model 3. Maybe they should go to the cheap steel. And give the people a car they can afford.
Casting it in one piece without heat-treat is very effective, and HS steel casting would be a lot more complex. But aluminum's lack of a fatigue limit can be a problem, I guess we'll see if the casting has been properly engineered to deal with that.
I think you should consider selling your analysis to financial trading outfits, like Bloomberg does with their data. They get it a week early for a small king's ransom.
Giga casting is going to take a lot of advance planing. Totally possible to get it working. But casting has the same but different issues of stamping. I wonder how they are going to deal with tool wear on the molds. Hmmm that's going to be expensive.
Jordan, I love the fact that I can go back and watch this multiple times to fully comprehend what you have laid out. You have a massive amount of information there... which is totally awesome. However, can the intricate design of a Tesla AL cast also make up for strength issues and deliver better safety results than HSS?
look at the Castings themslves , the Crash Rails and Reinforcement are Already formed into the Rear Casting. they will do the same for the FRONT casting , and they simply BOLT to the Structural battery pack.
The knowledge of the process will be key in other ventures later. Tesla already has to make cases for their motors this is an ideal process for many of those parts. The more unified type of skillset over the whole product the less input lines one needs.
The entire calculation is based on vehicle cost at time of sale which the primary motivator for most care shoppers. However, Tesla also appears to care about overall effect on greenhouse gases. For that, it may be better to look at 10-year total cost of ownership. Minimal vehicle body weight savings would have a dramatic effect on overall energy consumption for 10-yr 150K miles driven, further tipping the scale in favor of more expensive gigacast alloys with lower weight-to-strength ratios.
You have the cost savings between steel/aluminum pretty well nailed. My mind was thinking of some of the other factors are aluminum is corrosion resistant to salt that is put on the highway. Thus eliminating someone along the way having to undercoat the vehicle. I’m sure there are other advantages pointing towards aluminum than using steel in any automotive application. You didn’t mention the type of costs!
The costs were all inclusive 🤠 Pretty much everything you can think of. The only thing the studies didn't take into account was the effect of improved quality and the ability to ramp the factory more quickly.
One important fact has been completely kept out of the theoretical weight, strength and stiffness equation. Casting/moulding technology limits the minimum wall thickness. Theoretical mass and stiffness calculations become different when you can't make castings not thinner then 4-8mm although that would be enough for strength. Steel sheet products have almost no thickness limitations, can be as low as 0.2 mm So castings are always much havier because of wall thickness limitations. Why is Tesla using Al castings? They're a newbie in automotive/mechanical engineering and production technology. They try many things new and different, supported by companies always willing to expand their customer base. Some of these ideas are good and some of them are bad
Additional Notes on Variables:
1) (+) The Model 3 has a $28,000 production cost. This means Tesla could save more than what's indicated here.
2) (-/+) Tesla could keep the the battery and motors the same size. This would mean lower cost savings. However, the customer would still benefit from longer range, better MPGe, and acceleration.
Thanks for your support!
Great video really looking forward to seeing these incorporated into the Model Y and see what route Tesla takes, either lower cost or longer range.
Re: Steel vs Pressed AL. Is the AL ends intended to be sacrificial crush zones, so damage pressures will minimally intrude beyond the immediate ends being crashed upon? If so, will body shops be provided pressed AL "clips" by which they can quickly impart repairs vs steel?
I feel that this video understates the case.
1) Casting makes it easier to form complex shapes, with complex, deep embossed / raised ridges on any number of axes at once (as can be easily seen in the geometry of the casting). This increases the net thickness of the piece, and thus its stiffness.
2) Casting makes it easier to preform bolt holes, wiring mounts, and any number of fittings that would require extra machining or parts with conventional manufacture.
3) Apart from price, casting reduces the part and joint count. Each joint is a new opportunity for problems to emerge such as noise, improper alignment, bad welds, etc - you just get in general a better vehicle if you can keep the part count down.
One could also mention that UHSS is famously a pain to work with compared to HSS and esp. mild steel.
Are Ys with both front & rear castings now being made in Fremont?
@@karenrobertsdottir4101 Correct. One more benefit from the reduced part count is reduced inventory cost.
Jordan, this is top notch material science engineering analysis. It boggles my mind that you don't have a traditional engineering degree. You clearly are a super bright and capable guy! I'm surprised Tesla hasn't tried snatching you up 😉
🤜🤛 Thanks for the support as always Nick!
Shh nobody tell Dwight that Tesla makes SUVs and compact SUVs...
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 I respectfully disagree! Performing material analysis investigation, selection, and especially highlighting the magnesium strength & weight analogue study (which was then compared to aluminum), was some good engineering sleuthing. To put that all into a condensed and easy to understand presentation is where Jordan's top-notch work really shined.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 You’re speaking too soon. Tesla is already at nearly a million per year vehicle manufacturing run rate with just the two vehicle factories that it has, and the Shanghai Gigafactory hasn’t reached its peak output.
Also the Fremont Factory hasn’t fully ramped the new Model S production line or even started delivering the new Model X which typically outsells the Model S.
The Berlin Gigafactory is larger and more advanced than the highly efficient Shanghai Gigafactory which will improve the final product while simultaneously decreasing cost for Tesla’s European customers. Then there’s the Austin, Texas Gigafactory which is even bigger than Berlin and according to Elon will be used to test the cutting edge of Tesla’s manufacturing techniques so even more advanced than Berlin.
Tesla is forecasting a 20 million a year vehicle manufacturing rate by 2030 and I believe them. They’ve got practically unlimited cash and have shown that they can build two Gigafactory simultaneously in about a year for a cost of just ~$400 million each.
Contrast that with VW’s Tennessee EV plant expansion/conversion that costs $800 million or GM’s $2.2 billion dollar EV factory also in Tennessee, and you’ll start to understand Tesla’s huge capital efficiency lead.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 It's not small at all. You should not count how many cars the brand put out. Count how many they can put out on their most advanced factories. OEM does 200k at most per factory per year. Giga Shanghai's new Production Rate is 450k per year.
For your consideration... min 5:50 an increase in thickness increases stiffness👍, but also increases deformation energy absorption 👍👍.....The required thickness of some body components is not dictated by the service loads (stiffness) , but by the crash safety requirements (energy absorption). A thicker aluminum part will require (absorb) more energy to deform/crumple than a thin steel part. This makes the thicker part better/cheaper/lighter for crash worthiness.
Niiiiiice! Thanks for the info
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 fair point. post crash fire from a battery would take Tesla into Ford Pinto fuel tank problems.
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 I would say this is a misplaced priority. Protecting occupancies is more important than the battery. Given the stiffness of the battery, Tesla uses the battery to share loads in protecting occupancies.
@@quansun7633 -TESLA Already has BEST in class Safety.
@@quansun7633 Impact damage is a serious danger to humans, so is the explosion of a damaged lithium battery. Watch the hydraulic press channel vid where they crush a power bank 😳
I REALLY appreciate the detail and effort you put into these videos. I love learning about the reason why something is rather than just accepting that it is with a surface level overview. You are doing outstanding work and I am always excited to see your next video!
Elon has said his real technological advantage is in manufactring. A traditional car takes 22 hours for assembly, give or take an hour for what car/factory/brand you're looking at.
I've seen tesla saying it takes 10, yes ten, hours to ass'l the 3/Y with gigacastings.
So that's DOUBLE the production rate for the same size factory/workforce.
It's not only the throughput due to speed, less space is required for each production line as there are fewer steps, and a lot fewer robots. As the video says, there is an additional improvement in quality some defects, such as panel gaps, are only apparent further down the line. Improving the defect rate has a compound effect and makes the manufactuing more profitable.
Ten hours is not that fast... Nissan Sunderland can build a car from painted shell (coming into trim line) to start up in around 6 hours or so..might be quicker with no lunch break...
Each work assignment is well under 1 minute turn round.. has been the most efficient in Europe for years.. Tesla seem to think what they do is fast...haha... No where near.. what they do is brag about what they do... Need to try comparing data... Oh hang on.. he daren't...
Speed or throughput are not good key numbers to compare. A factory that produces a car in half the time but costs three times as much to build and operate is not better.
You need to break down speed and throughput into their associated costs. Both in capex and running cost. Again, using half the labour but spending twice the saved cost on electricity is no win.
There's another factor in play soon reducing costs of production. What to do with the main battery packs when they are no longer viable in a car. They are going back to the factories to be used as storage batteries linked to the factories own solar and wind farms. Nissan announced recently that they will be carbon neutral in the next ten years. Some going when you see the size of machines running. By reducing the third biggest cost of a car (1st being parts, 2nd being labour), the energy costs to make a car need to come down. These apply to all manufacturers.. something's they can't reduce such as labour costs but energy and parts they can control and can be ruthless. Suppliers tend to be moving nearer factories now, reducing costs of transportation and uncertainties in markets. Before covid most parts were made in very low wage countries... That's changing. The shortages of silicone chips has thrown another spanner in the works too... 90% of manufacturers are still on downtime working on and off as stocks arrive.. try buying a new car... Wait times are huge unless in stock.
There's also another factor in play.. new upstart companies trying for their own slice of the cake... Market share has shuffled around a lot.. China being a huge player in the EV markets now...
Consistency of quality for new companies... Can they keep it up...
@@terrybrown6057 google some...22 hours labor to build a car...remember the engine and transmission, seats and more arrive ready to assemble in the body.
Kinda related, but VW's chairman, Herbert Diess recently said that it takes Tesla 10 hours to make a model 3, but it takes 3 days to make a VW id.3. I assume he's talking about Giga Berlin and Al casting. He proposed tearing down some current plants and building back with more efficient plants. I think VW is getting the message, but other manufacturers....?
they are still building COMPLIANCE EV made with OLD FASIONED car Technology.
Diess said that it takes 30 hours……
the problem is that it seems Diess is alone at Volkswagen trying to convince them. So much that he dares mention the "T" word directly. It takes guts. I hope he gets fired from Volkswagen and Tesla hires him!
@@Akira-nw4jl I think all traditional auto manufacturers are facing boardroom struggles. IMO, Toyota is loosing the battle, BMW is on the fence while GM seems to be forging ahead. The recent sales numbers reported by Tesla are telling...they outsold BMW, Mercedes and Audi in the last quarter.
I don't know if it's already happened or not but Diess is facing a vote of no confidence at VW.
These guys are still pretending it's 1995 and it will take Diess a miracle to survive inside a dinosaur 🙄
For clarification, at 5:47 he is talking about flexural stiffness which is proportionnal to the cross section, lever effect and material deformation which are all proportionnal to the sheet thickness, hence the cubic power.
Good design means very little of the sheet material should undergo significant bending stress. In practice this means you don't get that cubic relationship
@@EdFrench_uk Well, it's under compression so buckling is an issue.
But I guess that the advantage of using aluminium is that you can use simpler shapes.
The dives. They are so deep. Fantastic research!
One of best explained cost analysis
5:38 I love the BTTF reference
You're videos are so interesting. Absolutely brilliant work. I feel like I'm watching a documentary with each episode.
Outstanding job Jordan! I appreciate the extraploation efforts!
I'm glad to hear it Jeff! Thanks for the support!
Excellent on all counts. A pleasure to watch and learn from your analysis. Thank you!
As deep dives go this channel excels. Just subscribed.
There's another cost:weight dynamic that is of increasing importance... the after sale cost of fueling/charging the vehicle increases with the weight of the vehicle. The old combustion industry didn't care, since that cost was born by the customer after they'd bought the car (the colatteral enviro cost being completely ignored for 100 years of combustion). Now with climate change driving the dynamic it becomes more important to factor in the impact of weight on the lifetime fueling requirements. Lighter total mass might eventually become more important than cheaper build and market price.
I’m not usually a fan of European regulations. However they have forced car makers to improve fuel consumption and safety of passengers and pedestrians.
Tesla did not want to be excluded from that market so designed its cars to exceed EU regulations.
Great content, and insightful comments, excellent channel you have Jordan. Thank you!
I love that you don’t chase the algorithm. It makes your channel fresh and authentic.
This new video is one of your best. You are sending most analysts to the corner of shame.
🤣 🔥 Comment of the day
Great video, and some really great discussion is being had below. You have attracted some knowledgeable viewers to your channel with the quality of your content Jordan.
😊 Yeah, I feel fortunate!
Great video. I’m a geological engineer but took a lot of material science courses (steel alloys, etc). Great high level laymen’s review and delivered better and in a more interesting way than in my courses haha
I love how so in depth you go with your videos!
Patreon supporter foreveeerrr!
🤜🤛🤠
Absolutely phenomenal. Can't believe the level of detail in these videos.
First time I've been served one of your videos.
Every follow up question I think of gets answered 30 seconds later.
Top notch material, thanks!
And, subscribed!
🔥🤜🤛
Hey Jordan, great work as always! Just curious: does the costing and cost savings include labor costs? With 1 part replacing up to or around 100 parts, I would assume there is a large amount of savings in labor just in assemblage of all that.
GREAT question! Yes, the MIT estimate included energy, labor, overhead, tool cost building cost, maintenance cost, material cost.
this is the nicest presentation about cars and contemporary engineering that I`ve ever found. The decisive criteria compared in different models with credible numbers in the overall system. What a wonderful world where the quality of information seems to get better every day. For this one I`ll make an exception and share it in my local network of business people...
I wish I could give this presentation TWO "likes."
This channel is so awesomely infomative.
Just to say, Magnesium and Aluminum have a similar melting point, about half of steel. Because the casting machine is made of steel with a similar melting point, and the desired crystal structure of the steel may not survive casting, casting steel seems unlikely. If possible, it would take more energy to melt the steel and cool the casting machine.
use Japanese crucibal Steel - Tamahagane.
Steel can not be used in die casting. The crystal structure devevelops during cooling the steel, and often further heat treatment. You typically need slow cooling, and cooling at the same rate everywhere in the part. Steel is just completely different to handle, and this method does not work.
What if… we just make a car out of water. It melts easily, takes any form and keeps that form once solid. Why arent Tesla execs thinking about this?
Correct. Steel can be cast, but with extreme difficulty, and NOT in this kind of detail. Incidentally, magnesium is a lot easier to cast than aluminium still, with noticeably longer die lifetime. Melting temperature is just one of many factors.
@@pasticcinideliziosi1259 We have more than enough ice cars.
But cars made of frozen water are new. Large ships have been build from ice, successfully.
The MVP the Limiting Factor provides IS the technical breakdown METRICS. The technical and the breakdown method are your bread and butter for delivering tasty metrics. Because your metric never does crossover into reductionism they enable value comparison. Its a brilliant undeniable claim you build from first principles without simply beginning from a general claim working backwards. Brilliant mind!
😁🤜🤛
I always enjoy your contents. Really informative and in simple terms.
What an awesome program. Reminds me of that show "how it's made" growing up
🤜🤛😀
Any plans for videos on Aptera Motors?
Love your videos, have you watched any videos from the Terran Space Academy Channel? It is similar to your channel, but he talks about rocket engines and aerospace!!
Cool company but I have a backlog of other things to cover at the moment. 🤠
Nah, I hadn't seen that channel. I'll check it out!
Great content, I've learnt a lot with the new casting in Tesla's production.
Wow. Really cool analysis. I remember manufacturing engineering questions in engineering economics classes I took where hypotheticals like this were worked through. Here is a real world example splendidly done. Outstanding video my friend.
Your videos and research make me much more comfortable investing so much of my net worth it TSLA. Thank you Jordan for helping me retire sooner.
Glad to provide useful information!
The complexity and depth of analysis is amazing in this video. What I am most interested in is the fact that the concept/vision/imagination of this product and procedure came first and is the "Cause" while the analysis is all after the fact. This is how most if not all great advancements have been made throughout history. The root cause of everything in the physical world is the unseen spiritual world of consciousness. Elon Musk clearly has an understanding of developed intuition.
Excellent content as always
Imagine the advantage of buying back old castings and recycling without the impurities
Yes aluminum cars also last so much longer. Without crashes in mind rust is almost solely responsible for cars needing to be scraped. Aluminum never rusts. It forms a small layer of oxide which is actually harder and more durable than normal aluminum. Aluminum parts are easily recyclable and have life spans of hundreds of year. A well maintained aluminum car without any steel could out live the owner. Especially electric cars. Less moving parts. Regardless of material gas engines will always die eventually because they break them themselves apart while in use. We could easily see cars lasting 20 30 50 even a hundred years with minimal maintenance. Carbon steel shouldn’t even exist anymore. It is one of the shity materials one could use. Regardless of what it’s properties are new a material which naturally and rapidly decomposes is useless. And the rust takes enormous amounts of energy and chemicals to recycle back into iron for making new steel. So much it’s not worth doing it. There is never, EVER a good reason to use carbon steel anymore for absolutely anything in todays world. There will always be materials better in every way that last longer and at similar or lower prices. The only reason it is used is stupidity and because if products die and need to be replaced it is profitable for manufacturers. I absolutely hate carbon steel. It is usually used in super expensive products that are disposable items because of carbon steel.
@jacobleeson4763 if you knew anyone in the trucking industry where they use aluminum frames on trailer bodies then you would know that aluminum will not rust but actually dissolve when exposed to salts
You rock! Best researched Tesla analysis out there. You deserve respect for building expertise while other Tesla TH-cam videos mainly discuss ideas we already understand.
Glad to hear it Patrick! I'm surprised that 18 months into this channel there is still so much to dig up.
Pretty decent analysis. Couple of refinements:
1. There is IMHO no universally-accepted definition of "high strength steel". So, be careful when comparing;
2. Magnesium is an oddity. Its USP's include high damping - ideal for dashboard support. Again, be careful what you compare...
3. Strength is easy to talk about until you look closer: e.g. fatigue strength and energy absorption potential are quite tricky to pin down.
Keep up the good work.
I am looking forward to your next videos! Did I miss something about the difference in tooling-cost between Gigacasting and HSS? I also missed the difference in the materials in corrosion-prevention. HSS will also have to be treated against corrosion right? Keep up the good work! Future patreon out!
Cheers man. Corrosion will be covered when we cover the alloy. The tooling cost, energy, labour, treatment etc were all covered in the DOE and MIT estimates.
@@thelimitingfactor Thanks, just rewatched those parts. Another thing I didnt see: waste material in stamping seems nill, just reprocess, but for HSS - waste?
Thank you for your dedication to reinforce and building shareholders conviction. Your videos are educational and well researched. Props to you!
@@AudiTTQuattro2003 Nothing is certain but death and taxes, and playing the market is gambling by any measure.
However, I can't think of a more certain bet today than this company. The next 4 years or so will reveal the answer, afterward will be building on the successful execution of Tesla's gameplan.
No, not a lock, and there is a chance I may not wake up tomorrow, but I don't bet against Elon.
That video was 20 minutes long? I could've sworn it was five. Thanks for the deep dive! I didn't know anything about the whole aluminum vs. high-strength-steel price tradeoffs before now.
Speaking of advantages, you left out one of the biggies, literally orders of magnitude better QC on the panel gaps. Elon was serious about microns vs the current millimeters.
Along with a brand new cutting edge paint shop, complaints about fit and finish will be history.
Covered in a previous video and will be covered again in the summary video
Rock on - Sandy Munro also did Analysis on Tesla Gigacastings.
says QC is minimal, and can Shread rejects and Damaged parts.
Complaints coming from customers are compared between manufacturers at 3 months of ownership (3MIS 3 Months In Service). This data is shared across manufacturers and QA evaluation data in house is compiled by each and published so manufacturers have an idea how they're doing. But... Tesla refuse to do this.... Why do you think that is? Customer satisfaction is more than just fit and finish...it's the complete ownership package.. how satisfied with the car are you... What issues did you have as warranty claims etc... Why don't Tesla publish their data? I would guess it's not upto scratch... If your good you'd make sure it was known...
I worked 30yrs inspecting quality of new vehicles.. I've seen some Tesla's parked... Oh dear... There's some real bad panel fits out there... Not saying each manufacturer is perfect but bleating on that Tesla will be perfect is a pie in the sky... In real life getting a cars panels to fit properly usually requires manual bending somewhat to get it to fit. If you think that an assembly line WILL turn out perfect panel fit you know nothing of how cars are made, how cars are adjusted or how they are repaired to be ready for the customer from new. Go on a car plant tour... You'll learn something
@@terrybrown6057 Why should Tesla have to do as the legacy car manufacturers have traditionally done? Our 2 year old Model 3 is perfect, panel gaps and paint are as good as any car (confirmed by detailers), reliability has been 100%, and build quality is very near to perfect.
The Tesla is MUCH better than any other new car we’ve owned, (and without counting, we have had a lot of new cars in the last 40 years.)
The Tesla is just in a whole different league compared to all my previous ICE cars, which over the last 40 years includes European, American, Korean and Japanese built cars.
@@FutureSystem738 as I said... As a customer you would never know how the company as a whole is performing. Yea, you have a car are happy with..great . But the truth is in warranty claims... Why do you think Elon refuses to publish warranty claims? Everyone else does. There are good cars with every company... But even with your detailers they won't have access to engineering standards and what tolerances are allowed before a fault becomes unacceptable. For example a panel that is designed to be flush +/-1mm... Each manufacturer has different levels of tolerances allowed as to what is achievable to the drawings. And what is allowed to be shipped out the door. So anyone working outside of QA at the manufacturer will never know what is allowed to be good or not. Every part has tolerances from fit n finish to even allowance on how hot an LED should be on a switch... What I'm saying is pure quality data is compared from sources of customers fault feedback and offline fault detection and treatment.
I really like your approach and delivery style.
Does the new aluminum save vs. HSS because of less anticorrosion/rust treatments being required?
That was factored into the calculations
Rust destroys cars...
Again a mind blowing video from Jordan 🤯🤩 Please support his brilliant work with Patreon !👍🍻
Japanese motorcycle makers often use cast aluminium frame parts. They look good and stiff structures are easier to make a than using steel tubes or steel pressings.
I can see Tesla using castings for door structures and for the car sides (A, B, C pillars plus roof and sill frames). These can be welded but today’s industrial adhesives could literally glue the car together.
Gained another subscriber today! Keep up the great work!
Jordon, thanks for the great content. It would be interesting to see a comparison of repair costs after a collision. I imagine repairing a one piece cast aluminum frame assembly would be extremely difficult.
Great content as always Jordan!
Hey thanks Sawyer! Love your work too. 🔥
Thanks Jordan! Totally geeked out on your in-depth analysis.
The knock-on effects are of wide ranging and long lasting benefits. Having worked as a Quality Engineer in manufacturing I cannot begin to tell you the tremendous cost benefits of do-it-once-and-done manufacturing process with the Giga Castings. By replacing 70 parts with just the rear castings in the Model Y will not only reduce manufacturing logistics cost and increase vehicle performances but increase the overall fit, form, function quality and durability of the vehicle. This will reduced after delivery servicing and increased customer satisfaction.
This is the Holy Grail of manufacturing.
Hey Robert! Thanks for sharing! I love hearing insights like this from people in the industry.
Lol..... its only tesla that was using 70 parts for the rear.
The Holy grail of manufacturing is f1 technologies those people are able to extract the most power out of everything possible tbh.
@@moineaux9173 Are F1 cars sold to the masses?
Nice work! There a whole area of Industrial engineering name OR, operational research, today with assembly simulation all this question can be answered, including all Capex and Opex, even what happens with cost fluctuations 😁
I’m getting more and more excited when I see you posting videos. Thanks Jordan! I’m gonna have to join you on Patreon finally.
Jordan, while discussing rigidity: "there's a twist."
...best pun I've heard in months
😁
The lack of heat treatment in aluminum means better dimensional tolerances/repeatability vs steel. They may see this as a way to improve quality control in scale up.
My guess is that your analysis is a lot more comprehensive than that carried out by most vehicle companies. I think you got it right about the inertia of sunk costs and techniques effectively dictating the continued use of established materials. Most car companies will focus on specific areas of a vehicle rather than assess it holistically. Tesla only ventured into Giga castings because it was a way to simply the manufacturing process of the rear substructure that they had developed for the model 3 and model Y, the original being a dogs breakfast of a myriad of parts that were expensive to assemble. However a good idea applied in one area often lends itself to other areas and sets in motion new trains of thought. It is only a matter of time before the electric motor outer casings become integral with the subframes as a further step in reducing parts and simplifying processes both of which contribute directly to reducing manufacturing costs.
🙌
I couldn’t tell from the video so I’ll ask, you’re quoting a lot of metrics about aluminum but some of those properties could vary from what Tesla is using unless you’re using specific data from an analysis of Teslas materials? Sandy Munro mentioned they had very exotic alloys to give more of the properties they need. Any way to account for some of those specifics (if they’re available) if you didn’t already? Love the breakdown and detail, just wondering how much variance there may be from what tesla is actually using. Thanks for any feedback!
Ok caught up at the end.. my questions will be answered in the coming videos :) Can’t wait. Thanks!
Hehehe, yeah, got a lot of info out the patent
The resultant stiffness is the cube of the depth of a plate in bending but you also divide by the depth of the most extreme fiber when integrating it to get the resultant deflection meaning the best way to look at stiffness is by the square and not cube.
A new video today! How did you know it's my birthday?
This video is very informative Jordan, I congratulate you. On aspect I am not sure you touched on is the higher rebate that automakers like Tesla may get if they sell the aluminum scrap, which is more worthy. Also, what is the circularity of the aluminum gigacasting? Do you think that this will drive use of aluminum sheet usage in other parts of the vehicle to feed and subsidize the gigacasting process?
It has been reported Tesla recently ordered a 12 ton gegacasting press, which will allow it to make a whole body casting, and 5,000 cars a day. My best guess is this won't/can't be used for larger vehicles like the Cycbertruck but can be used for their smaller $20k economy model hatch back. Worth checking into.
The Limiting Factor is "over"! 🤖🧡
Another opportunity for economies of scale is the possibility to use the same casting for both front and rear. maybe that's how we ended up with rear wheel steering on the Cybertruck.
NO, gm is using the same BOF and suspension as Regular trucks , you can add Quad steer as Aftermarket option. not that hard to do.
Question will be , how much Quad steer will CT get 10% or 15%.
Your analytics are exquisite! One of my favorite Patreon contributions! Fantastic work, dude!
Thank you for sharing. It will be useful for engineering students.
You compare the cost per unit weight of steel versus aluminium. When you create stamped steel parts, there is a lot of waste steel that gets thrown away. When you create cast aluminium parts there is very little waste. Are you using the amount of steel (weight) that ended up in the vehicle, or the amount of steel that was purchased - in other words, do you need to include the cost of the steel that was thrown away.
Good question! The research was pretty comprehensive, I'd have to look through all of it.
The off cuts are recycled back... Not thrown away
@@terrybrown6057 I'm happy to hear that, but since the price that they get for the recycled cuts is less than the cost of new material, that difference would have to be included in the overall cost. Not sure if it significant, but it could be.
@@lauriedavis7088 depends on whether the car plant has its own smelter ... Some do..
Yet another amazing video, Jordan!
I just had one question, are we accounting for higher scrap rates (over 50%) for these kind of large aluminium castings or is Tesla avoiding that with the use of their special Al alloy material?
From memory, the scrap rate is very low for these. Like less than 10%. I forget where this was mentioned, but I think it was on an earning call.
Thanks on the shootout and bravo for the perfect pronunciation.
Regarding the video, I'm betting on Berlin to be 2M per year and Austin at least 3M once fully ramped.
This is breath taking research. Analysts get paid way more to do way less. No wonder they don't have a clue.
Very in depth video.. now i know how advance tesla in manufacturing as elon said manufacturing will be tesla’s advantage in the future.. looking forward for the next video on this series. thank you.
As always, impressively thorough analysis and explained in terms even I am able to follow! Thank you for your excellent work
You had me at microcrystalline grain structure.
🤣🤣🤣
You rock! Excellent work, young man. Your detail is impeccable.
First your videos and content are awesome. My comment intends to take nothing from that. I feel you have underestimated your emphasized savings. You made room for it but the number range in your conclusion is just very low. The plant space, labor, equipment, jigs, coatings, treatments and mechanical adjustments of the array of steel assembled into the body all add dramatically to cost. Labor and rework=more labor is king. I think the giga casting is a massive savings vs conventional builds. I offer this as an electrical engineer on a couch with an opinion in the hope that you can with your superpowers make it into more robust content at some point. Any detail is more that I have provided. Footnote: I grew four large successful manufacturing operations in my life with my opinions... Again love your work, patreon and huge fan...
Hi Eric! For sure! I was angling to underestimate. I'd also note that the MIT paper and the DOE work appeared to take into account the factors you mention above. That is, aluminum is a material just costs more, and even if gigacasting eliminates all production costs, it's about the same price as stamped aluminum.
However! How many more cars is Tesla able to pump out of this line for lower capital cost? That is, I find it difficult to assess how much more quickly the lines ramp, how much higher quality they'll be, and how much that will suck money into Tesla's coffers 😀
@@thelimitingfactor I think Aluminum sheet does not talk to a cast part from a labor and square footage perspective. The large casting is not what those papers were thinking. It is not the material, it is the complexity and piece count. Labor and variance are Huge costs, they dwarf material in manufacturing. I get the underestimate part but I think you did such a good job you underrepresented the point significantly...
How is this content free. Just phenomenal. Couldn’t be more impressed.
I'd like to thank my Patreon supporters for making it possible
I love the random back to the future reference
😁
Jordan, could you make a video or videos on how to do the kind of stupendous extensive research you do and also how to present such complex matter so clearly ! Would appreciate it a lot !
At some point yes!
:)
What I can see in steel having a HUGE advantage is the cost and ease of repairing after a collision. Aluminum seems to be very expensive to repair and requires very specialized techniques.
See the the crashworthiness video
Jordan, just a thought. In an accident the aluminium is probably harder but more easily fractured than the steel is. Instead of passing the impact through to the passengers the aluminium takes the brunt & gives way; ie crushes in the moulded areas. Steel at the battery frame is necessary for stiffer protection but would be harsher on those inside.
Amen! That's my understanding as well!
When it comes to nuanced analysis of complex material science and manufacturing cost systems Jordan is a super ninja 🥷
You just destroyed an MIT cost study with a few well reasoned analogs. Well done, grasshopper.
🤜🤛 😁
@10:23, stiffness is a function of moment of inertia, I, rotated about its principal axis times E, the modulus of elasticity. The symbol K is often used to represent stiffness. K = fn ( E, I). The value of I depends on its geometry. For a given geometry, the value of I is the same regardless of the material. However, K is different between a steel and aluminum part having the same geometry because E (steel) is greater the E(aluminum). The only way for an aluminum part to achieve the same stiffness as a steel part is to increase I, ie change of geometry of the part such as making it beefier. A beefier aluminum part would cost and weigh more, two factors not considered in the “Final Tally.”
Difficult making hollow section, if you're not using sand casting and hollow sections are usually good for moment of inertia, where you get both increased bending stiffness and increased structual stability. I also wonder if they need to add material places, that are not necessarily needed from a structual perspective in order to make the casting process work.
This video is so great. But it remains in my mind why your analysis doesn't include corrosion resistance as a consideration. The simplicity of EVs strike me as a reason to go for long life durable vehicles which retain value. I'm thinking aluminium is more corrosion resistant, but nice if you addressed it.
Thanks man! Corrosion resistance is a property of the alloy. It's a series and will be covered in the appropriate video (the next video of the series)
FYI the whole-body casting patent Tesla applied for a few years ago (15:20) was declined because multi-die castings are already a thing, and application to a full car body was not seen as sufficiently novel. Not that having a patent would determine whether they'd do it or not in the future -- they just don't want other people beating them to the patent and blocking it from being an option.
The giga-cast is cool. But I can't even afford to look at a Tesla. I think Ford solves the problem pretty well with the F 150. They use the same full frame design as always, and put the battery in the middle same as a Tesla. $32,000 after tax credit. Seats 5. 200 miles range. It looks like a truck.
If $28,000 is the cost to make a model 3. Maybe they should go to the cheap steel. And give the people a car they can afford.
Yes and more deep dive on battery manufacturers please
Casting it in one piece without heat-treat is very effective, and HS steel casting would be a lot more complex. But aluminum's lack of a fatigue limit can be a problem, I guess we'll see if the casting has been properly engineered to deal with that.
I think you should consider selling your analysis to financial trading outfits, like Bloomberg does with their data. They get it a week early for a small king's ransom.
Giga casting is going to take a lot of advance planing. Totally possible to get it working. But casting has the same but different issues of stamping. I wonder how they are going to deal with tool wear on the molds. Hmmm that's going to be expensive.
This is some high quality info! Thanks for putting these together.
Video is very informative, thank you !
Jordan, I love the fact that I can go back and watch this multiple times to fully comprehend what you have laid out. You have a massive amount of information there... which is totally awesome. However, can the intricate design of a Tesla AL cast also make up for strength issues and deliver better safety results than HSS?
look at the Castings themslves , the Crash Rails and Reinforcement are Already formed into the Rear Casting.
they will do the same for the FRONT casting , and they simply BOLT to the Structural battery pack.
Fantastic hard-core technical video!
Great video! Also where do you get the tesla footage from?
Tesla Twitter account job adverts
The knowledge of the process will be key in other ventures later. Tesla already has to make cases for their motors this is an ideal process for many of those parts. The more unified type of skillset over the whole product the less input lines one needs.
The entire calculation is based on vehicle cost at time of sale which the primary motivator for most care shoppers. However, Tesla also appears to care about overall effect on greenhouse gases. For that, it may be better to look at 10-year total cost of ownership. Minimal vehicle body weight savings would have a dramatic effect on overall energy consumption for 10-yr 150K miles driven, further tipping the scale in favor of more expensive gigacast alloys with lower weight-to-strength ratios.
Very interesting analysis!
You have the cost savings between steel/aluminum pretty well nailed. My mind was thinking of some of the other factors are aluminum is corrosion resistant to salt that is put on the highway. Thus eliminating someone along the way having to undercoat the vehicle. I’m sure there are other advantages pointing towards aluminum than using steel in any automotive application. You didn’t mention the type of costs!
The costs were all inclusive 🤠 Pretty much everything you can think of. The only thing the studies didn't take into account was the effect of improved quality and the ability to ramp the factory more quickly.
Undercoating is a Band-Aid for rust issues in the eastern United States...
One important fact has been completely kept out of the theoretical weight, strength and stiffness equation. Casting/moulding technology limits the minimum wall thickness. Theoretical mass and stiffness calculations become different when you can't make castings not thinner then 4-8mm although that would be enough for strength. Steel sheet products have almost no thickness limitations, can be as low as 0.2 mm So castings are always much havier because of wall thickness limitations. Why is Tesla using Al castings? They're a newbie in automotive/mechanical engineering and production technology. They try many things new and different, supported by companies always willing to expand their customer base. Some of these ideas are good and some of them are bad
Excellent analysis.
great analysis; thank you!