Report: Cybertruck Battery Pack Production Will Initially Begin at Tesla Fremont Factory

[JBee]

I don't think the battery pack is that complicated (all things considering). Wouldn't it be cheaper to ship the cells? IDK if they are transporting battery packs they will be weight limited before space limited on trucks.

Will they transport by rail?

This is why I think this first pack will be different from the Texas packs.

The cells will be graded on the factory floor and then installed into packs in the same assembly line. Way to much effort in double handling the cells by shipping them in between each step, let alone trying to match cells in a pack on the other side of the country. The difference in transport weight between them is trivial being about 2ton a cbm (35cf), if in a box or pack, so weight is already the limit.

Around 170kWh is all that will comfortably fit in the area between the wheels on the CT in one layer of cells, so as previously I think 420miles is going to be the number in a single layer pack, but all will be Quad motor standard, there might be a performance version, using better cell grades, but otherwise there will be no software limits either. Motors will be the same, like in the M3/MY performance software upgrade option.

Technically, the 2170 pack could be just as structural as the 4680 pack, if not more so because the smaller cell size has more cell wall area and more distributed structure. Externally, there need not be any difference at all to the structural pack, the 4680 cell is only 10mm higher (3/8") than a 2170 cell, so the external housing could be exactly the same for each, and either could flow into the same assembly line as required by production numbers.

Sponsored

 

[CyberOwl]

I do wonder about structural pack survivability/repairability. Specifically shear force in relation to cell wall strength. In the event of a crash the structural battery will need to be protected from forces great enough to rupture the cell. Some sort of breakaway will need to be employed. That threshold will determine if the pack breaks apart during a wreck. It’ll be interesting to see what it takes to kill a truck.

 

[JBee]

The closest part to an impact area is the side, in the MY they have some padding area and frame in that area to protect the pack. That padding area needs to absorb enough energy to accelerate the CT vehicles mass inertia and against the traction of the tyres in a side impact. Once the CT is sliding sideways the acceleration forces go back to nil until the whole nightmare stops.

Front and rear impact have enough space before the pack is impacted, unless maybe an offset crash. Larger dimensioned vehicles are generally easier to manage deceleration rates without peaks. Protecting the pack is secondary to occupants, in that the cabin structure should remain intact after a collision regardless, and as such so will the pack.

Of all the directions an impact can occur directly, namely from the bottom up into the pack, it is also the most unlikely impact area in a collision, unless you launch the CT in a jump and the suspension collapses. Having the batteries low center of gravity in the cabin floor also means it's unlikely to roll and expose the underside either. Incidentally, the pack might also be useful in deflecting and absorbing a small IED from the underside. Either way, even if there is pack damage, it's important that egress is possible before it becomes critical.

As for shear do you mean if only an upper or lower section of the pack sandwich is impacted? The pack sidewalls should transfer the load into both the upper and lower skin at the same time, so shear should be moderate at best. The main one from what I can tell is the torsional strength of the pack, (twisting) as this will be constantly loaded from driving on undulated roads and also the one that will expose the cell walls with loads they don't like the most. Overall, the thickness of the upper and lower skin of the pack sandwich will bear the brunt of all the forces involved, and would be designed to exceed them.

 

[Tinker71]

well, Dec 2023 is looking like it may be pushed out again......still no giga press despite the rumors 3 weeks ago of it being in Houston, batteries are a question and although Y's are shipping from Giga Texas, how many of those have 4680's.....IMHO, we are still a good "moon shot" away from seeing CT's in any configuration........I personally, at 46k on the reservation list, will not accept a CT with 2170's knowing a few months later the 4680s will be available......there just seems to be a lot of speculation on all fronts to get any type of good feeling......even watching the cathode construction, which seems to be going well, they have to finish it in order to accept the contractual obligation from their supplier for the material to make product......sorry if I sound pessimistic.......

2170 are great batteries. The

The cells will be graded on the factory floor and then installed into packs in the same assembly line. Way to much effort in double handling the cells by shipping them in between each step, let alone trying to match cells in a pack on the other side of the country. The difference in transport weight between them is trivial being about 2ton a cbm (35cf), if in a box or pack, so weight is already the limit.

Around 170kWh is all that will comfortably fit in the area between the wheels on the CT in one layer of cells, so as previously I think 420miles is going to be the number in a single layer pack, but all will be Quad motor standard, there might be a performance version, using better cell grades, but otherwise there will be no software limits either. Motors will be the same, like in the M3/MY performance software upgrade option.

Technically, the 2170 pack could be just as structural as the 4680 pack, if not more so because the smaller cell size has more cell wall area and more distributed structure. Externally, there need not be any difference at all to the structural pack, the 4680 cell is only 10mm higher (3/8") than a 2170 cell, so the external housing could be exactly the same for each, and either could flow into the same assembly line as required by production numbers.

I love it. The critical interface is the perimeter and the seats. A 2170 pack could be either 10 mm shorter or that 10 mm void could be made up with corrugation in the bottom plate or more goo.

Some folks are down on the 2170 which is a shame. Their volume was optimized for charge rates (heat dissipation) and performance if not mistaken. They might be just a little heavier and expensive, but still a great battery. They are also proven and available in quantity.

 

[Tinker71]

I agree. Only the 10% -80% range matters for cross country travel, so 500 EPA = 450 real = 225 towing 100% = .7 x 225 = 157.5 miles towing real world range. This matches up with the Rivian / Lightning pack size and efficiency data. If you increase CT to 180 kWhr min, and give tesla a better cg and overall efficiency, that is doable. I am hoping Tesla squeeks out the last 20 miles somehow and we get a real world 180 mile range. I am in at that performance level, especially if they go with 900V architecture / charging curve and can optimize the charging to achieve 30 minute 10/80 charge rate.

Maybe semantics, but on a long trip you would start every day with a full charge. Depending on Supercharger spacing you might charge at 5% state of charge.

The 80% rule is for long term battery health and day to day driving. A reasonable person would realize the the minor degradation of charging to 100% for occasional trips is worth the time savings of eliminating extra stops. The top 10% of your battery will take approximately as much time as charging from 20-80% with current tech. So if there is a line up or you want to get on the road faster you might choose to stop charging at 80-90% for that reason

Still if you plan on towing a home on wheels. BEV is not there yet.

 

[charliemagpie]

I don't think there is any compromise, battery or other.

The lead time to test and tune began at Freemont, and now it is a bridging facility.

 

[Cherokee180C]

Maybe semantics, but on a long trip you would start every day with a full charge. Depending on Supercharger spacing you might charge at 5% state of charge.

The 80% rule is for long term battery health and day to day driving. A reasonable person would realize the the minor degradation of charging to 100% for occasional trips is worth the time savings of eliminating extra stops. The top 10% of your battery will take approximately as much time as charging from 20-80% with current tech. So if there is a line up or you want to get on the road faster you might choose to stop charging at 80-90% for that reason

Still if you plan on towing a home on wheels. BEV is not there yet.

Yes you could use 100% for starting charge, but then you get into the entire do you even have enough time overnight to get to 100% calculation. As you elude to above, when doing any cross country no one charges above 80% due to the time penalty, not battery capacity. Charging from 80% to 100% is at such a low Kw rate, that it will take as long as the 10% to 80% charging time. Also no-one would plan to arrive at 5% as too many real world variable like rain, temperature, wind, etc could make actual usage higher than planned and you could get stranded on the road. I will stick by my statements above that only the 10%-80% range matters for cross country towing.

 

[Cherokee180C]

I don't think there is any compromise, battery or other.

The lead time to test and tune began at Freemont, and now it is a bridging facility.

There are several technological advantages the 3680 will bring. Unfortunately most not delivered yet. Dry battery cathode and anode process, less internal resistance for better heat dissipation / flatter theoretical charge curve, higher energy density from optimized chemistry changes. To be honest I think Tesla is sandbagging now and holding all these things back as they concentrate on volume production first and then will push performance envelope. Right now they have been brilliant at feigning no real improvement to allow baseline performance data collection and cancel any Osborne effects. Wait until they have full capacity production and magically all these improvements show up.

 

[charliemagpie]

Fair Dinkum, I just think its crazy talk. lol


What is it ? Do I lose 5% over 1 million miles ? Or do I lose 5% over half a million miles ?


The way things are progressing, by the time the Tesla battery starts to be degraded, you would want to upgrade to the new double range, 5 million mile anyway.

 

[Ogre]

Fair Dinkum, I just think its crazy talk. lol


What is it ? Do I lose 5% over 1 million miles ? Or do I lose 5% over half a million miles ?


The way things are progressing, by the time the Tesla battery starts to be degraded, you would want to upgrade to the new double range, 5 million mile anyway.

I really wish people would drop the silly expectations. Like 0.1% of cars survive a million miles and very few vehicles operate at 95% of performance even after 250,000 miles. Setting silly goals which are clearly not expected of current fleets is unreasonable.

Teslas tend to degrade 5-10% in the first year then slowly degrade over time. Seems like by around 400,000 they have about 80% of capacity. But this is improving all the time and we only have real world data on cars which have been on the road for ~5+ years.

The million mile battery is supposed to have 80% of capacity after a million miles of normal (not ideal) use. But Tesla doesn’t talk about or warrantee any batteries for that long. This is an aspirational goal their battery engineers pursue.

 

[Cyberman]

triber truck was always later if I remember right

Originally, the tri motor was to be produced at the tail end, but due to popularity, it was flipped to first in line, as per Elon. The assumption is that dual motor is next still, and finally cyclop motor. But it seems to be kinda fluid.

 

[greggertruck]

Originally, the tri motor was to be produced at the tail end, but due to popularity, it was flipped to first in line, as per Elon. The assumption is that dual motor is next still, and finally cyclop motor. But it seems to be kinda fluid.

I’m encouraged by seeing model Y prices drop in China. I bet we see same in 3 months here. 1-2 punch to legacy that won’t get IRA.

 

[BillyGee]

I'm just glad I'm far enough back in line for initial run bugs to be ironed out.

 

[greggertruck]

I'm just glad I'm far enough back in line for initial run bugs to be ironed out.

That’s a healthy rational perspective dude. And price will probably be down then.

 

[RR2241TX]

By the time my number comes up there’ll be an 8 wheel 16 motor option with an onboard nuclear power station. I’ll need the life support option package as well. Save materials on mine, make the body out of pyre wood.

Sponsored