dalton108
Well-known member
- First Name
- Dalton
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2020
- Threads
- 132
- Messages
- 4,020
- Reaction score
- 8,102
- Location
- USA
- Vehicles
- ā24 FS/CB; ā24 MX; ā23 MS PLAID (Prior: ā20-MY; ā21-M3P) (Also: ā14-FJ; ā21-C8)
- Occupation
- Lawyer
I was too busy making jokes at @CyberGus expense to remember to engage with the actual comment. Yeah I think heās wrong on this. Itās not just stainless steel itās HFS and Tesla absolutely said that thereās no way they could put curve in it and thatās why they had to spend all that money on air bending equipment just to fold it enough to get the truck made.I don't believe that's true. Flatness was imposed by the choice of the material for the structural skin.
Effectively they wanted to make it as thin as possible for cost/weight reasons, but strong enough to contribute towards the rigidity of the vehicle. That is how they decided on the cold-rolled [stainless] steel, which is both clever and problematic. The clever part is that cold-rolled gives them [work] hardened steel without having to do post-processing (heat treatment, which for parts of that size, volume, appearance, distortion issues would be a non-starter anyway). The problematic part is that even at a relatively low thickness it's already difficult to bend and practically impossible (again cost effectively) to stamp. This is manufacturing in reverse - normally stamping would be done in the annealed state to reduce stamping tool wear and pressure requirements, but here they start with hardened material and thus can't apply traditional sheet metal processes. The fact this is stainless steel adds a bit to the naughty mix, but I don't believe it adds as much as the fact it's hardened. Most of the famous naughtiness of stainless is revealed in welding and machining processes, not as much in stamping.
Then, the choice of stainless steel for exterior had a different design basis. They wanted to reduce cost and increase volume production by eliminating the need for the paint steps. Obviously stainless is more expensive than comparable grades of carbon steel, but they wouldn't do it if the numbers weren't pretty close and overall win was achieved.
I don't believe aerodynamics is a product of size. You can have very large objects that are aerodynamic, and very small things that are the opposite. What you're citing is the drag coefficient, which indeed factors in the size as it deals with forces which will increase with object's size.
Sponsored
Last edited: