The Tesla discussion
09-25-13, 06:38 PM
#166
Tesla Model S involved in 'unintended acceleration' incident
Tesla Model S involved in 'unintended acceleration' incident
The words "unintended acceleration" have, in the last few years, been closely connected to Toyota. While today's news is just one case, it does attach the phrase to a new car, the Tesla Model S. Here's the situation.
One Model S owner complained to NHTSA yesterday that his wife took the car for a drive over the weekend and, as she was leaving the driveway, "the car suddenly accelerated. It hit a curb and the middle portion of the car landed on a 4.5-foot high vertical retaining wall." The question is why, and the complaint alleges that even though a Tesla engineer told the owner that the accelerator has a built-in safeguard to stop it from going above 92 percent, the records show that the pedal was depressed and the car, "accelerated from 18 percent to 100 percent in split second." The owner denies that his wife stepped all the way down on the pedal.
Date Complaint Filed: 09/24/2013
Component(s): ELECTRICAL SYSTEM , ENGINE , SERVICE BRAKES
Date of Incident: 09/21/2013
NHTSA ID Number: 10545230
Crash:Yes
The car was going at about 5 mph going down a short residential driveway. Brake was constantly applied. The car suddenly accelerated. It hit a curb and the middle portion of the car landed on a 4.5 ft high vertical retaining wall. The wall is one foot away from the curb. The front portion of the car was hanging up in the air. The car was at about 45 degree up and about 20 degree tilted toward the right side. An engineer from Tesla said the record showed the accelerating pedal was stepped on and it accelerated from 18% to 100% in split second. He blamed my wife stepping on the accelerating pedal. But he also said there was a built-in safe-guard that the accelerator couldnot go beyond 92%. The statements are contradictory. If there is a safeguard that the accelerator cannot go beyound 92%, there would be no way that my wife could step on it 100%. There were some mechanical problem that caused the accelerator to accelerate on its own from 18% to 100% in split second.
Component(s): ELECTRICAL SYSTEM , ENGINE , SERVICE BRAKES
Date of Incident: 09/21/2013
NHTSA ID Number: 10545230
Crash:Yes
The car was going at about 5 mph going down a short residential driveway. Brake was constantly applied. The car suddenly accelerated. It hit a curb and the middle portion of the car landed on a 4.5 ft high vertical retaining wall. The wall is one foot away from the curb. The front portion of the car was hanging up in the air. The car was at about 45 degree up and about 20 degree tilted toward the right side. An engineer from Tesla said the record showed the accelerating pedal was stepped on and it accelerated from 18% to 100% in split second. He blamed my wife stepping on the accelerating pedal. But he also said there was a built-in safe-guard that the accelerator couldnot go beyond 92%. The statements are contradictory. If there is a safeguard that the accelerator cannot go beyound 92%, there would be no way that my wife could step on it 100%. There were some mechanical problem that caused the accelerator to accelerate on its own from 18% to 100% in split second.
09-25-13, 08:51 PM
#167
Lexus Test Driver
Thread Starter
It will be with Hertz.
Read more
The Tesla Model S will be available in California - at San Francisco and Los Angeles airports -- and are the 85kWh model, capable of 265 miles on one charge. The all electric, zero emissions car can go 0-60 mph in 4.2 seconds. The Tesla Model S is the world's first premium sedan built from the ground up as an electric vehicle. At the heart of Model S is the proven Tesla powertrain, delivering both unprecedented range and a thrilling drive experience. With a rigid body structure, nearly 50/50 weight distribution and a low center of gravity, Model S offers the responsiveness and agility expected from the world's best sports cars while providing the ride quality of a luxury performance sedan. The Tesla Model S was named Motor Trend's 2013 Car of the Year [R] and received Consumer Reports highest score ever given to a car as well as NHTSA's 5-star safety rating.
10-02-13, 05:52 PM
#169
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
tesla in ball of flames... 
stock downgraded, drops 6%
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...grade/2911345/
stock downgraded, drops 6%
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...grade/2911345/
10-02-13, 11:53 PM
#170
Lexus Test Driver
Apples to Oranges. There was no competition for the car when it debuted over 100 years ago so development was expedited and it was an opportunity for many people to enter a new business. Today with regulations and an oil industry that is as powerful as it comes and with people happy with their cars its not as simple as just making a network.
Your claim that "development was expedited" is also hard to accept, given the sheer number of types of engines that existed for the decades in which the early automobile evolved. For example, a lot of early (talking pre-1900) car engine technology in America was actually based on completely electric systems. That's right, the EV was actually an invention of the 1800s. The reason is that all-electric is the easiest type of car power to design and implement; all you need is a battery and a simple motor. (As a side note, given how lousy EV shortcomings are even today, you can imagine how bad they were back then!) Want to know how many other engines largely preceded the internal combustion engine? After electric engines, try steam-powered engines and even gasoline-powered electric motors!
The ICE took forever to catch on because it was the hardest to properly design and implement. Early versions of the ICE were regarded as unreliable, noisy, and primitive. The reason ICEs became the standard is that consumers demanded higher power and effectiveness, and that's what ICEs could provide. They wanted the increased value that ICE-powered travel represented. The automobile companies made ICEs because the people wanted them, not because the government wanted people to drive them. Consumer desire for increased value drives market forces to demand innovation, which results in natural development of technologies and expansion of infrastructure - a simple concept that many people in today's era seem to forget or ignore.
Finally, it's also ironic you mention regulations as an actual negative for EV success today. In Tesla's case, they have only ever reported a profit due to regulations.
10-03-13, 09:02 AM
#171
Lexus Champion
Tesla later issued a statement describing what happened.
"Yesterday, a Model S collided with a large metallic object in the middle of the road, causing significant damage to the vehicle," Tesla said.
"All indications are that the fire never entered the interior cabin of the car," Tesla said in its statement. "It was extinguished on-site by the fire department."
The Model S is a fully electric car with its battery pack housed in the floor of the vehicle. Tesla said the fire started when the metallic object directly hit one of the 16 modules within the Model S battery pack.
"Because each module within the battery pack is, by design, isolated by fire barriers to limit any potential damage, the fire in the battery pack was contained to a small section in the front of the vehicle," a spokeswoman said.
"Yesterday, a Model S collided with a large metallic object in the middle of the road, causing significant damage to the vehicle," Tesla said.
"All indications are that the fire never entered the interior cabin of the car," Tesla said in its statement. "It was extinguished on-site by the fire department."
The Model S is a fully electric car with its battery pack housed in the floor of the vehicle. Tesla said the fire started when the metallic object directly hit one of the 16 modules within the Model S battery pack.
"Because each module within the battery pack is, by design, isolated by fire barriers to limit any potential damage, the fire in the battery pack was contained to a small section in the front of the vehicle," a spokeswoman said.
10-03-13, 03:54 PM
#172
Please Calm the Hell Down About the Tesla Model S Fire
BY DAMON LAVRINC10.03.134:00 PM
The first reported Tesla Model S fire happened in Kent, Washington this week. The driver claims to have run over a large metal object and pulled over when the car alerted him something was wrong. He got out and some time later the front of the EV began burning.
The news of the fire and accompanying video sparked hundreds of headlines, and when the New York Stock Exchange closed yesterday, Tesla’s stock had dropped to $180.95. Today, it’s been hovering in the low $170s, and all in, one fire cost Tesla around $600 million in valuation.
Between 2006-2010, there have been an average of 152,300 car fires in the U.S. each year. They account for 10 percent of reported fires in the states. But you rarely hear about the Toyota Camry that goes up in flames after something pierces its gas tank.
The fact is that on-board energy storage is dangerous. The same fire could have happened to another EV, a traditional internal combustion engine, a hydrogen fuel cell, a compressed air-powered vehicle, or any other fuel that can propel a two-ton hunk of metal, plastic, and rubber down the road at freeway speeds.
In a statement released by Tesla, the automaker said that “a Model S collided with a large metallic object in the middle of the road, causing significant damage to the vehicle.” Tesla spokeswoman Elizabeth Jarvis-Shean confirmed to the New York Times that the fire was caused by a “direct impact of a large metallic object to one of the 16 modules within the Model S battery pack,” but because each cell is isolated by design, the fire wouldn’t spread to the rest of the pack.
Jarvis-Shean has confirmed to WIRED that it is in possession of the Model S at one of its facilities and is “studying what happened.”
Tesla had a brief brush with a car fires in 2011 when it recalled 439 Roadsters after one fire was reported by an owner and was linked to a 12-volt cable located behind the front headlamp. And Tesla’s not alone.
Boeing had a much-publicized fire onboard its new Boeing Dreamliner due to a lithium-ion battery pack, resulting in the grounding of its entire fleet of 787s before a fix was made.
But the bottom line is simple: energy storage — in all its forms — is problematic. And this is just the latest incident that proves it.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/10...-model-s-fire/
BY DAMON LAVRINC10.03.134:00 PM
The first reported Tesla Model S fire happened in Kent, Washington this week. The driver claims to have run over a large metal object and pulled over when the car alerted him something was wrong. He got out and some time later the front of the EV began burning.
The news of the fire and accompanying video sparked hundreds of headlines, and when the New York Stock Exchange closed yesterday, Tesla’s stock had dropped to $180.95. Today, it’s been hovering in the low $170s, and all in, one fire cost Tesla around $600 million in valuation.
Between 2006-2010, there have been an average of 152,300 car fires in the U.S. each year. They account for 10 percent of reported fires in the states. But you rarely hear about the Toyota Camry that goes up in flames after something pierces its gas tank.
The fact is that on-board energy storage is dangerous. The same fire could have happened to another EV, a traditional internal combustion engine, a hydrogen fuel cell, a compressed air-powered vehicle, or any other fuel that can propel a two-ton hunk of metal, plastic, and rubber down the road at freeway speeds.
In a statement released by Tesla, the automaker said that “a Model S collided with a large metallic object in the middle of the road, causing significant damage to the vehicle.” Tesla spokeswoman Elizabeth Jarvis-Shean confirmed to the New York Times that the fire was caused by a “direct impact of a large metallic object to one of the 16 modules within the Model S battery pack,” but because each cell is isolated by design, the fire wouldn’t spread to the rest of the pack.
Jarvis-Shean has confirmed to WIRED that it is in possession of the Model S at one of its facilities and is “studying what happened.”
Tesla had a brief brush with a car fires in 2011 when it recalled 439 Roadsters after one fire was reported by an owner and was linked to a 12-volt cable located behind the front headlamp. And Tesla’s not alone.
Boeing had a much-publicized fire onboard its new Boeing Dreamliner due to a lithium-ion battery pack, resulting in the grounding of its entire fleet of 787s before a fix was made.
But the bottom line is simple: energy storage — in all its forms — is problematic. And this is just the latest incident that proves it.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/10...-model-s-fire/
10-03-13, 06:26 PM
#174
problem with lion is that when it combusts, it is very quick and violent.
Also, Tesla uses sheet battery that goes under most of the vehicle - this is why it handles so well. Other manufacturers locate further up and away from dangers of the road, so thats why you didnt see much about other Hybrids or Phevs combusting after crash.
so i guess while Tesla is in some ways one of the safest cars on the road, at the same time, location of the battery could certainly be a problem in a crash.
Thats kind of what happens when you crash test based on official tests and not real life possibilities.
Also, Tesla uses sheet battery that goes under most of the vehicle - this is why it handles so well. Other manufacturers locate further up and away from dangers of the road, so thats why you didnt see much about other Hybrids or Phevs combusting after crash.
so i guess while Tesla is in some ways one of the safest cars on the road, at the same time, location of the battery could certainly be a problem in a crash.
Thats kind of what happens when you crash test based on official tests and not real life possibilities.
10-03-13, 07:08 PM
#177
Pole Position
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: California
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's pretty scary. I can see a recall happening as soon as they find a way to reinforce the battery compartment.
10-05-13, 11:04 AM
#178
Lexus Champion
I got an email from Tesla on the event....
Earlier this week, a Model S traveling at highway speed struck a large metal object, causing significant damage to the vehicle. A curved section that fell off a semi-trailer was recovered from the roadway near where the accident occurred and, according to the road crew that was on the scene, appears to be the culprit. The geometry of the object caused a powerful lever action as it went under the car, punching upward and impaling the Model S with a peak force on the order of 25 tons. Only a force of this magnitude would be strong enough to punch a 3 inch diameter hole through the quarter inch armor plate protecting the base of the vehicle.
The Model S owner was nonetheless able to exit the highway as instructed by the onboard alert system, bring the car to a stop and depart the vehicle without injury. A fire caused by the impact began in the front battery module – the battery pack has a total of 16 modules – but was contained to the front section of the car by internal firewalls within the pack. Vents built into the battery pack directed the flames down towards the road and away from the vehicle.
When the fire department arrived, they observed standard procedure, which was to gain access to the source of the fire by puncturing holes in the top of the battery's protective metal plate and applying water. For the Model S lithium-ion battery, it was correct to apply water (vs. dry chemical extinguisher), but not to puncture the metal firewall, as the newly created holes allowed the flames to then vent upwards into the front trunk section of the Model S. Nonetheless, a combination of water followed by dry chemical extinguisher quickly brought the fire to an end.
It is important to note that the fire in the battery was contained to a small section near the front by the internal firewalls built into the pack structure. At no point did fire enter the passenger compartment.
Had a conventional gasoline car encountered the same object on the highway, the result could have been far worse. A typical gasoline car only has a thin metal sheet protecting the underbody, leaving it vulnerable to destruction of the fuel supply lines or fuel tank, which causes a pool of gasoline to form and often burn the entire car to the ground. In contrast, the combustion energy of our battery pack is only about 10% of the energy contained in a gasoline tank and is divided into 16 modules with firewalls in between. As a consequence, the effective combustion potential is only about 1% that of the fuel in a comparable gasoline sedan.
The nationwide driving statistics make this very clear: there are 150,000 car fires per year according to the National Fire Protection Association, and Americans drive about 3 trillion miles per year according to the Department of Transportation. That equates to 1 vehicle fire for every 20 million miles driven, compared to 1 fire in over 100 million miles for Tesla. This means you are 5 times more likely to experience a fire in a conventional gasoline car than a Tesla!
For consumers concerned about fire risk, there should be absolutely zero doubt that it is safer to power a car with a battery than a large tank of highly flammable liquid.
— Elon
The Model S owner was nonetheless able to exit the highway as instructed by the onboard alert system, bring the car to a stop and depart the vehicle without injury. A fire caused by the impact began in the front battery module – the battery pack has a total of 16 modules – but was contained to the front section of the car by internal firewalls within the pack. Vents built into the battery pack directed the flames down towards the road and away from the vehicle.
When the fire department arrived, they observed standard procedure, which was to gain access to the source of the fire by puncturing holes in the top of the battery's protective metal plate and applying water. For the Model S lithium-ion battery, it was correct to apply water (vs. dry chemical extinguisher), but not to puncture the metal firewall, as the newly created holes allowed the flames to then vent upwards into the front trunk section of the Model S. Nonetheless, a combination of water followed by dry chemical extinguisher quickly brought the fire to an end.
It is important to note that the fire in the battery was contained to a small section near the front by the internal firewalls built into the pack structure. At no point did fire enter the passenger compartment.
Had a conventional gasoline car encountered the same object on the highway, the result could have been far worse. A typical gasoline car only has a thin metal sheet protecting the underbody, leaving it vulnerable to destruction of the fuel supply lines or fuel tank, which causes a pool of gasoline to form and often burn the entire car to the ground. In contrast, the combustion energy of our battery pack is only about 10% of the energy contained in a gasoline tank and is divided into 16 modules with firewalls in between. As a consequence, the effective combustion potential is only about 1% that of the fuel in a comparable gasoline sedan.
The nationwide driving statistics make this very clear: there are 150,000 car fires per year according to the National Fire Protection Association, and Americans drive about 3 trillion miles per year according to the Department of Transportation. That equates to 1 vehicle fire for every 20 million miles driven, compared to 1 fire in over 100 million miles for Tesla. This means you are 5 times more likely to experience a fire in a conventional gasoline car than a Tesla!
For consumers concerned about fire risk, there should be absolutely zero doubt that it is safer to power a car with a battery than a large tank of highly flammable liquid.
— Elon