Engineering Explained:Why Tesla's Are Bad at Towing

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Thank you for your support.



I'd be made happy with a summary in the new post of the addition to the Dr. Bronner All One-God-Faith style wall of text in Permalink #1.

Is there a post with a picture of a Showstar? If you do an image search you might want to have Safe Search: On.

I thought everyone had already seen the TFLcars.com YouTube video and Jason Fenske's 'Why Tesla's Are Bad at Towing' YouTube.It'd be pointless to attempt here,to compensate for the deficit.You'll never figure out what Adam's talkin' about until you take a peek at Eve.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

Also this is not a Tesla thread. It's about towing with an EV so a Rivian thread if anything as they will be the first to market with a capable EV tow rig.

Exactly! A chassis is power agnostic.It doesn't matter where the power comes from.Squirrel-cage,rubber bands,solid-fuel rockets,baking soda and vinegar,it's all good!
I see no reason over all the controversy.The towing issue has only attracted attention to a retarding of technology in the trailer industry.Not BEVs.
Rivian will have no trouble being a 'truck.'
And all the tricks I used to extend the range of Tesla has been in the public domain since before the invention of the internal combustion engine.Michelangelo knew about it.

[freebeard]

I thought everyone had already seen the TFLcars.com YouTube video and Jason Fenske's 'Why Tesla's Are Bad at Towing' YouTube.It'd pointless to attempt here,to compensate for the deficit.

I was asking for a friend.
I did that image search and found this:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Y2vh7chFviI/maxresdefault.jpg

It was much faster than sitting through a video. Is this what were talking about? How does it relate to the Bowlus Road Chief?

I have my own theory about an aero trailer.

Decades ago,about four universities,working together,were able to model a closed,a cubic-octet 'foam',which achieved the theoretical upper boundary for elastic strength in all modulii.

Citation needed. Is it Fuller's vector equilibrium?

https://www.boredart.com/wp-content/...-vectors-4.jpg

[ldjessee00]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Meanwhile, back at The Whiteaker:

I do believe 3D printed metal can be very strong, but since this is a cast aluminum piece that was made from a 3D printed master, not sure if that is at issue here.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I was asking for a friend.
I did that image search and found this:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/Y2vh7chFviI/maxresdefault.jpg

It was much faster than sitting through a video. Is this what were talking about? How does it relate to the Bowlus Road Chief?

I have my own theory about an aero trailer.



Citation needed. Is it Fuller's vector equilibrium?

https://www.boredart.com/wp-content/...-vectors-4.jpg

Your trailer is similar.Theirs is a 16-footer.Cimarron told me that all their trailers are custom built,per customer specs,and I'd have to get the VIN for them to tell me the actual dimensions.So I had to attempt scaling off the computer screen.I'm in the ball park.Frontal area is around 62-sq-ft.A little over 93-inches tall.95-inches wide at the exposed wheels/fenders.It's a semi-V-nose,which actually hurts it aerodynamically.A Featherlite,more-blunted-nose,car-hauler would pull easier.Their fenders aren't as offensive either,and they offer a softer radii,especially up top.ShowStar has no belly pan.From the energy balance,the Tesla/Cimarron combination is approx. Cd o.4526 (higher than Jason allows),and a drag factor of CdA 28.06 sq-ft,also higher than SAE suggests.At 9860-pounds all-up weight.
The combination can be lowered to Cd 0.2035,and CdA 16.8 sq-ft,with 66.5 mpg-e,and 202.9-miles range in California.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bowlus-Teller Road Chief has been reintroduced.'Naked',in a wind tunnel,it has the drag of Dymaxion (0.25) and approx. 49.3-sq-ft frontal area.Streamlined,with the Tesla X,the combination is approx. Cd 0.153,at CdA 7.556 sq-ft,103.6 mpg-e @55-mph,and 316.3-miles range,on the available 92.24 kWh .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As to the architecture,all I can say is that it is described as a (a cubic-octet) closed cell foam.It's the strongest structural element known.

[freebeard]

As to the architecture,all I can say is that it is described as a (a cubic-octet) closed cell foam.It's the strongest structural element known.

Patented by R.B. Fuller in 1961:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_frame

Describing it as a foam rather than a truss is copacetic with Synergetics; the mathematical foundation of the octet truss. Fuller conceptualized beginning with closest-packed spheres.

http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synerg...figs/f1301.gif
__________________

Nobody has explained to my satisfaction how the title Engineering Explained:Why Tesla's Are Bad is not about Tesla but about Rivian and towing trailers.

[redpoint5]

It's 1 thing to discuss engineering that very few of us would be willing to adopt out of personal interest, and another to discuss engineering that would have appeal to the masses.

Hersbird brought up the fact that any pickup can have a tonnau added, but what percent of people will have a tonnau added? The fact that it's built into the design of the CT gives it the advantage there. Efficiency and utility are baked into the design, something which most consumers will not mess with.

Design should have an efficiency focus, but it's also got to appeal to the consumer. The most efficient design in the world means nothing if consumers don't buy it.

[freebeard]

It's 1 thing to discuss engineering that very few of us would be willing to adopt out of personal interest, and another to discuss engineering that would have appeal to the masses.

??? It's all engineering. The thread title is Engineering Explained. Apparently there is an Overton Window. Three-dimensional trusses include Alexander Graham Bell's tetrahedral truss, the MERO truss* and the octet truss.

*

The masses don't engineer their own environment, it's left to the professionals. I thought I'd get some interest in the Limousine Drift thread. Maybe I don't get what appeals to the masses.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by freebeard

I thought I'd get some interest in the Limousine Drift thread. Maybe I don't get what appeals to the masses.

The point of that post was too abstract and lost on most people, myself included. It was a video capture of some kid playing a game with a limo driving in reverse. Not sure what relevance it had with any of the topics at hand.

[freebeard]

That's why it went in The Lounge. Should I not have done that?

The far-too-obtuse-point was that when I was a sprout, automotive entertainment* consisted in going to the Dallas airport for the destruction derby. At some point I was sickened by having to watch the sacrifice of a white 1954 Studebaker 4-door.

Today, even without a VR headset, you can enjoy the spectacle without so much air pollution and tire wear. I saw the first (or 2nd?) Fast & Furious. He went through four sets of tires for practice.

I think that's progress. Thanks for asking.
_______________

Back ontopic:

duckduckgo.com/?q=cybertruck+engineering

Like the AI-optimized A-arms for the Arcimoto FUV, the design can't be changed without weakening it.



* There exists a 2013 video of The Beast with the Stig taking it around the Top Gear track.