edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:49 am

GRA wrote:The driver died at Stanford med center. First two photos (the rest are just Tesla stock fluff) here show the aftermath, including a front shot of the interior of the car (the rest is melted)...

No, it didn't melt.

The entire front end of the X disintegrated on impact, and the fire flared up later, as shown in the video at the link below:

Tesla Model X after crash fire on highway 101

New video emerged from the scene of Friday's fiery Tesla Model X crash. The witnesses first helped to remove the driver from his Model X then shot this video, shared by NBC.

NBC's Ian Cull shared this new video of Friday's Highway 101 Tesla Crash, which happened in Mountain View, CA. It's fiery. You can see the the flare-ups starting the 14th second.

The witness, who sent NBC this video, says he shot the video right after he and his friend helped pulled the driver from the burning car. The driver later died at the hospital from his injuries...

https://www.torquenews.com/1/video-emer ... el-x-crash

Unfortunately, saving the driver from the battery fire did not save him from the fatal impact.

Sooner or later, you'll see a video of a Tesla crash followed by a battery pack fire where the driver and/or passenger(s) could not be extracted in time, and that's when the question of why only TSLA needs to use flammable battery packs may have to be answered...

sparky wrote:...I'm more convinced, based on other TMC posts, that the gore-point barrier hardware was not in place and that is what made this crash so deadly. Based on crash test videos of the sort of barrier at this location, I find it incredible that the Model X would have sustained such damage if a working barrier was present...

Designing and maintaining roads to make them idiot-proof will never be 100% effective.

Primary responsibility will always reside with the pilot, or autopilot, to avoid driving into a fixed barrier.
no condition is permanent

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 11:04 am

another AP crash...
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

GRA
Posts: 9260
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 3:36 pm

edatoakrun wrote:
GRA wrote:The driver died at Stanford med center. First two photos (the rest are just Tesla stock fluff) here show the aftermath, including a front shot of the interior of the car (the rest is melted)...

No, it didn't melt.

The entire front end of the X disintegrated on impact, and the fire flared up later, as shown in the video at the link below: <snip>

Yup, my mistake.

edatoakrun wrote:Unfortunately, saving the driver from the battery fire did not save him from the fatal impact.

Sooner or later, you'll see a video of a Tesla crash followed by a battery pack fire where the driver and/or passenger(s) could not be extracted in time, and that's when the question of why only TSLA needs to use flammable battery packs may have to be answered....

The answer to that is energy density/specific energy. The question is whether Tesla's NCA packs are sufficiently more dangerous than other chemistries to make a significant difference in safety, and how they stack up compared to ICE fire probability. Obviously, the ideal pack would be 100% safe as well as meeting all other requirements (cost, weight, space, reliability, specific energy/power and densities, etc.,) but such a battery or any other power source doesn't exist and never will - all design decisions are compromises.

I did think it odd that the gore point lacked the usual linked water-filled drums upstream from it, but perhaps this site uses a higher tech solution such as sparky linked. I'm not terribly surprised that the driver died given the nature of the crash, and assuming the barrier was hit head on I have my doubts that any car would be likely to do any better at that impact speed (well above the NHTSA barrier tests), so to me the important issue is whether the car was under A/P or not.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 4:40 pm

Well the choices are limited

medical emergency
suicide
AP failure
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

lorenfb
Posts: 1835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 10:40 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:Well the choices are limited

medical emergency
suicide
AP failure


Possibilities a little extreme and too limited? How about a careless/bad driver?
Leaf SL MY 9/13: 66K miles, 50 Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=78, L2 charges to 100% > 1000, max battery temp < 95F (35C), min discharge point > 20 Ahrs

cwerdna
Posts: 8221
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: Tesla Model X

Sun Mar 25, 2018 11:39 pm

GRA wrote:I did think it odd that the gore point lacked the usual linked water-filled drums upstream from it, but perhaps this site uses a higher tech solution such as sparky linked. I'm not terribly surprised that the driver died given the nature of the crash, and assuming the barrier was hit head on I have my doubts that any car would be likely to do any better at that impact speed (well above the NHTSA barrier tests), so to me the important issue is whether the car was under A/P or not.

For the benefit of others, from the TMC thread, the gore point had some compression device that at least from semi-recent dashcam footage (see https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads ... st-2636752), likely wasn't reset and repaired after a previous collision. So, if any vehicle hit it (like the Model X involved), it wouldn't absorb much of the vehicle's kinetic energy and they'd basically be hitting a concrete barrier.

That thread has really "blown up" and I have no time to follow it any more, nor that much interest.

Besides the scenarios the DaveinOlyWA listed + what lorenfb added, I'd also add vehicle malfunction or stuck accelerator, including possibly entrapment via floor mat. As for careless/bad driver, yep. For all we know, they were driving in the wrong "lane" (point leading up to the barrier at the split) and couldn't change out of it in time, possibly blocked on the left and/or right.

We may never know due to the amount of destruction and given that the driver died.

'13 Leaf SV w/premium package (owned)
'13 Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium packages (lease over, car returned)
'06 Prius

Please don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Tesla Model X

Mon Mar 26, 2018 1:43 pm

Comment section to article below has a few new photos, including the pack fire at full (?) intensity:

https://electrek.co/2018/03/23/tesla-fi ... more-64160
no condition is permanent

lorenfb
Posts: 1835
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:53 pm
Delivery Date: 22 Nov 2013
Leaf Number: 416635
Location: SoCal

Re: Tesla Model X

Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:21 pm

edatoakrun wrote:Comment section to article below has a few new photos, including the pack fire at full (?) intensity:

https://electrek.co/2018/03/23/tesla-fi ... more-64160


electrek wrote:It’s a tragic accident, but as previously discussed, nothing indicates that electric vehicles, like Tesla’s vehicles, catch on fire more often than gas-powered cars.
It’s not uncommon for any vehicle to catch on fire after a severe high-speed crash, which seems to be the case here.
But with this said, it’s still important for first responders to have a good understanding of how to approach a lithium battery fire.



But given the heat intensity of a Li battery fire vs a ICEV gas fire, is the injury/damage outcome equal?
Most ICEV gas fires I've seen, mostly damage wiring, plastics, and rubber. Rarely does the heat intensity
melt Al (intake manifolds). Note that fire burned thru the vehicle’s firewall into the cabin area,
i.e. there was no dashboard remaining. Yes, a majority of damage resulted from the impact,
but the Li fire compounded the damage. It is possible that the MX was perpendicular to the barrier
at impact shearing the front-end off, i.e. the MX was sliding sideways at impact. Having batteries in the
front seems questionable and very dangerous after this accident.
Last edited by lorenfb on Mon Mar 26, 2018 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Leaf SL MY 9/13: 66K miles, 50 Ahrs, 5.2 miles/kWh (average), Hx=70, SOH=78, L2 charges to 100% > 1000, max battery temp < 95F (35C), min discharge point > 20 Ahrs

GRA
Posts: 9260
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Tesla Model X

Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:02 pm

R&T article on how a Model X does in snowy/slushy conditions in NYC, generally very positive with a few quibbles (slow operating FWDs allow pax to get soaked as expected, high winds can cause them problems too; windshield wipers smaller than windshield):
Tesla Model X P100D: The Nor'easter Test
How does an all-wheel drive electric crossover fare in winter?
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/a19298886/tesla-model-x-p100d-the-noreaster-test/
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Tesla Model X

Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:06 am

lorenfb wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:Comment section to article below has a few new photos, including the pack fire at full (?) intensity:

https://electrek.co/2018/03/23/tesla-fi ... more-64160


electrek wrote:It’s a tragic accident, but as previously discussed, nothing indicates that electric vehicles, like Tesla’s vehicles, catch on fire more often than gas-powered cars.
It’s not uncommon for any vehicle to catch on fire after a severe high-speed crash, which seems to be the case here.
But with this said, it’s still important for first responders to have a good understanding of how to approach a lithium battery fire.



But given the heat intensity of a Li battery fire vs a ICEV gas fire, is the injury/damage outcome equal?
Most ICEV gas fires I've seen, mostly damage wiring, plastics, and rubber. Rarely does the heat intensity
melt Al (intake manifolds). Note that fire burned thru the vehicle’s firewall into the cabin area,
i.e. there was no dashboard remaining. Yes, a majority of damage resulted from the impact,
but the Li fire compounded the damage. It is possible that the MX was perpendicular to the barrier
at impact shearing the front-end off, i.e. the MX was sliding sideways at impact. Having batteries in the
front seems questionable and very dangerous after this accident.


I have "seen" a handful of car fire aftermaths where it was not only impossible to tell what kind of car it was. It was impossible to tell what "style" of car it was...

Fire will destroy if you let it. Gas, Li, etc. it doesn't matter. The car fuels itself.
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Return to “Other Electric Cars & Plug-In Hybrids”