Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

electrek.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 504 posts

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#491

Post by panick21_ »

_ea1k wrote: post #290
p_l wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What everyone was waiting for was for Italians to make the huge casting press so that castings could be done in mass production at automaker margins.

Despite Tesla's boastings, large casting machines have existed before. Automotive use is the new part.

What's actually new and interesting here is the combination of size and speed. Sure casting existed, but for it to be the backbone of a super fast production line like that of a Model Y, they needed to do a lot of work.

Larger parts were often dipped into liquid, because air cooling resulted the part bending.

Tesla internal materials team worked on new alloys to improve this, while working in coordination with the machine manufacture to get up the cycle times.

And they are continuing to work with them. Tesla is using newer more advanced cooling systems in Texas then they did in the California factory. Because cooling is one of the limiting factors in Cycling these machines.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#492

Post by panick21_ »

hef19898 wrote: post #378
grecy wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but there are probably reasons it hasn’t already changed everywhere else Yes, the legacy OEMs are constrained by their suppliers, who dictate what they can (not) do.

In automotive, it is usually the other way round. Regardless, what exactly was wrong with the existing 12 and 24 V systems for auxiliaries that absolutely needed to be changed?

Of course it didn't 'absolutely' need to be changed. But the same can be said for 1000000 other innovations cars made since the Model T.

In the long term it will safe money while while being more efficient. As cars get more and more electronics it becomes more and more relevant.

Its something everybody has understood for decades, but nobody had a long term enough look to make it happen. Car companies were struggling t show profit. And in the 2000s companies like GM literally went bust.

And yes its true, OEM can tell suppliers what to do. But if you want something that suppliers don't have at hand, your gone pay for development. And if you are say GM, to move to 48v you need to literally coordinate the work of 100ish suppliers to bring the product together.

And remember, these OEM since the 90s have outsourced the majority of all electronics devices and the waste majority of the software. Do they have the internal expertise to manage such a transition?

Look at over-the-air updates, its still not standard. And even those cars that can over-the-air update, that mostly only for some of the core main components. Lots of the supplier delivered parts can still not be upgraded like that.

And the car industry had plenty of troubles in the 2000s so its not surprising they didn't do stuff like that.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#493

Post by klysm »

Trex_Egg wrote: post #243
klysm wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t it be PoC instead of PoE?

Power over Ethernet (PoE) is a technique for delivering DC power to devices over copper Ethernet cabling, eliminating the need for separate power supplies and outlets. Source: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/s...

Yes, but afaik CAN is not usually done over Ethernet

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#494

Post by myself248 »

jjeaff wrote: post #479
myself248 wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh I hope nobody's doing that, rechargeables have been so good for so long. I'm just now retiring some that I bought in the 2007-2011 timeframe which have started to fail, but my 2015 purchases are still going strong with hundreds and hundreds of charge cycles on 'em. I haven't used alkalines since the 80s.

I have not had great luck with rechargeables. They have a lower voltage than regular AA, so I find that most sensitive electronics just start out thinking the battery is already low and then stop running before the battery is fully discharged. My Z-wave keypad lock is one of those. AA batteries last about 2 months, rechargeables start giving a low battery warning after a week and hardly last 2-4.

I return garbage products like that. Not supporting rechargeables in 1980 was sort of forgivable, but they've had 40 years to get their act together.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#495

Post by SigmundA »

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #464
SigmundA wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally the battery is the regulator it serves to buffer inrush loads and absorb spikes.

> Normally the battery is the regulator For a 12v system, of course. But on a modern 48v system who knows what they decided. Having a switching regulator with built in current limits might be helpful.

Its actually difficult to for a "regulator" to do what battery does, the battery can output significant surge as needed and its resistance drops as voltage rises absorbing large spikes without issue.

In the Cybertruck there would need to be a DC-DC buck that could handle the 48v inrushes properly from the 800v traction battery and spikes would have no where to go as the DC-DC would not be bi-directional or even if it was could not react fast enough.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#496

Post by TheLoafOfBread »

panick21_ wrote: post #488
TheLoafOfBread wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, then you should maybe ask why do you need such complexity, when cars 5-10 years did not needed to do exactly same task - taking a person from point A to point B.

First of all, there are regulatory issues, that continually demand more both in terms of efficiency and in terms of safety. System that were innovative 10 years ago are not a requirements and new system are recommended and will soon be required. And that is just for minimal compliance. If you actually want to be up to date on safety systems you need even more. Second, if you are a company you need to actually sell pr…

Or their architecture is just bad - aka when you need Ethernet for your brakes.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#497

Post by mmaunder »

lmpdev wrote: post #369
mmaunder wrote: post #246

Many comments here seem to be confusing the accessories circuit voltage with the electrical vehicle motor and drive system. The vehicle motors have a combined power output of 450KW which requires a high voltage 800V system or the wiring would be so heavy it would not be feasible. This spec appears to be the accessories circuit with Tesla pushing for a new 48V standard. That’s super smart because it immediately means…

I get this a lot I work at an electronics store in Australia This week I had a customer dumbfounded why his 3,500W inverter almost caught fire He was using 8-gauge wire (~56A max) He needed 00-gauge (almost 300A max) If he’d have run the system at 48V instead of 12V he’d have saved $200+ per metre on cabling his inverter My advice on voltage selection for a vehicle is once you’re needing more than a few metres of 0-g…

Thanks for posting this - I only noticed your reply now. Exactly this. Installing inverters for my own projects is what really highlighted the amp/volts/gaugerelationship. I quickly moved to 24V and will push for 48V for my next. As an aside I use Victron gear which I'm very happy with. Biggest install is for a film van and has dual 5KW inverters that can deliver 8KW continuous - and it's a 24V system.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#498

Post by panick21_ »

TheLoafOfBread wrote: post #496
panick21_ wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First of all, there are regulatory issues, that continually demand more both in terms of efficiency and in terms of safety. System that were innovative 10 years ago are not a requirements and new system are recommended and will soon be required. And that is just for minimal compliance. If you actually want to be up to date on safety systems you need even more. Second, if you are a company you need to actually sell pr…

Or their architecture is just bad - aka when you need Ethernet for your brakes.

Break-by-wire is pretty standard by now. Unless you have any evidence that the system Tesla uses is worse then traditional automotive CAM and that it is so much worse that there will be lots of Cybertrucks unable to break then I'm just gone go with team of engineers who designed a new system after having decades of experience with the older system rather then some guy on HN.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#499

Post by pokey00 »

15155 wrote: post #469
myself248 wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would they need those? All the stuff that's natively 12 volts now could simply have been made natively 48 volts. You can make a 48-volt lightbulb as easily as a 12-volt lightbulb. You can make a 48-volt motor as easily as a 12-volt motor. Actually, motors for higher voltage tend to be smaller and lighter, which is why industry tends to go straight for 4160-VAC motors whenever 480VAC is inadequate. What applicatio…

> Why would they need those? To convert voltages to useful levels without suffering massive losses in efficiency. > What applications cannot be made to work at 48? Basically every logic-level transistor will not work at 48V. It's nice that these last-century analog devices could be made to operate at different voltages: present-day semiconductors are not so conveniently flexible. Simple physics dictates that required…

You didn't have to convert voltages all the time for things you did in a car until relatively recently. All the typical 12V stuff could've run at 48V no problem. By the time we wanted to put computers in cars and charge our cell phones, switching supplies were readily available. The only part of the system now that really benefits from lower voltages are semiconductors.

Re: Tesla shares 48V architecture with other automakers

#500

Post by r3d0c »

flappyeagle wrote: post #14
r3d0c wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

weird comment... maybe we shouldn't feel the need to idolize humans...

It’s ok to like people

did i say it wasn't ok to like people? i used the word idolize, almost like they're different words with different definitions
Post reply on HN