Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Transportation Technology

Elon Musk Explains Why Tesla's Cybertruck Windows Smashed During Presentation (theverge.com) 145

When Elon Musk unveiled the Tesla Cybertruck last week, things didn't go according to plan when lead designer Franz von Holzhausen tested the durability of the Cybertruck's "armor glass." He managed to smash two of the vehicle's windows onstage with a metal ball, soon after smacking the door with a sledgehammer (unlike the glass, it was fine). We have now learned that, according to Musk, it was this sledgehammer impact that damaged the glass, which is why the windows subsequently smashed when hit by the ball. The Verge reports: This seems plausible, especially as Musk also shared a slow motion video of von Holzhausen performing the same exact test before the event, with the ball bouncing harmlessly off the window. The combined impacts likely weakened the glass, setting the stage for the eventual smash. (Though why the back window broke as well isn't clear: the passenger door didn't get whomped by the sledgehammer.) At any rate, the smashed glass was just one moment in an event which gave viewers plenty to talk about without the on-stage mishaps. The divisive design and impressive specs of the Cybertruck have caught the world's attention, and since the unveiling Musk has been drip-feeding bits of information on Twitter to keep people engaged.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Elon Musk Explains Why Tesla's Cybertruck Windows Smashed During Presentation

Comments Filter:
  • by rmdingler ( 1955220 ) on Monday November 25, 2019 @09:39PM (#59454934) Journal

    "With the widespread use of shields, anyone of even minimal importance wore a body shield to protect against criminals, assassins, and accidents. Such a practice made the use of projectile weapons and thrown blades partly obsolete. The only effective combat method was the deft use and careful precision of a handheld dagger, if moved slowly enough. New styles of fencing and knife fighting (and ball bearing flinging) were developed to take advantage of this one small vulnerability."

  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Monday November 25, 2019 @09:49PM (#59454972)

    I am pretty sure in the previous Cybertruck launch I saw a Slashdot post saying it was probably the hammer blow that affected the glass... I could see it affecting even the rear window as the ultra-stuff body probably carried the vibrations quite far across the face of the thing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Oh yeah, it could stop a bullet, but not vibrations from a hammer. So stupid.

      • by lgw ( 121541 )

        Most bulletproof glass is only good for a few hits. Did he ever claim the glass was bulletproof though? (N.B., most bulletproof glass still shatters when hit, as it's a laminate that keeps it bulletproof, not tough glass. The inch-thick stuff won't shatter, but it's really heavy.) I thought he was only talking about the body panels - which also aren't "bulletproof" unless qualifies with an armor level Stopping a pistol bullet is one thing, a 7.62 rifle round is quite another.

        • by rossdee ( 243626 )

          "Stopping a pistol bullet is one thing, a 7.62 rifle round is quite another."

          There's also a lot of variation in penetration among rifle rounds. a 7.62x51 NATO (or a 7.62x54R ) hits a lot harder than a 7.62x39 (AK)

          • While true to an extent, they all hit massively harder than a 9mm from a handgun, and they would all punch through that 3mm of stainless steel.

        • When I saw them hitting the glass sheet which was lying flat I already wondered what they expected the glass to do. Bullet proof glass is supposed to break. It acts a bit like a net which absorbs the power of the bullet and keeps it from going through. Glass which remains intact when hit is another design. So which design were they demonstrating.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        It doesn't stand up, does it? He hit the front door, but the rear window shattered also. The shattering was in the exact pattern you would expect from being hit by a ball, not from the bottom where the window was hit.

        Also the fact that the door panel can survive being hit with a hammer isn't a good thing. It's supposed to deform to absorb some of the impact of a side-collision, with internal bars to stop protrusion into the cabin. This is just going to make accidents worse for both the passengers of the Tes

        • who now get the full amount of acceleration transferred to their bodie

          welcome to the world of airbags

          • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            That's not what airbags are for, and besides which there isn't room for one in the middle because there is a seat there. Lateral force will push one of the passengers towards the middle of the vehicle, restrained only by their seatbelt which is mostly for arresting forward motion.

        • by yorgasor ( 109984 ) <ron@tr[ ]chs.net ['ite' in gap]> on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @11:08AM (#59457032) Homepage

          Yeah, I'd really like to see the crash test results from this thing. The strong exoskeleton is great for farm use from the lack of denting, but I was just in a car accident where some teenager pulled out in front of me as I was doing 60mph on the highway. We were in a Honda Odyssey, and my 3 kids and I in the car were able to walk away because the car crumpled properly and absorbed a lot of energy from that crash. I'm not quite sure we would've been so lucky in this.

      • Oh yeah, it could stop a bullet, but not vibrations from a hammer. So stupid.

        Yep. That's pretty much how these things work. No where is the the expectation of some "maximum". That this surprises you shows everyone how little you know about glass.

    • When the truck first was revealed, all I could think was how ugly it was. Now, as more time goes by, the more I want one. Irrational desire perhaps? But what taste isn't irrational?
      • I think it looks kind of cool myself.

        • I can see that people either like or dislike the design- its hard to remain neutral since it is so different from what we have on the road today. I also think it might make what we drive today to seem as quaint as the fins on the back of mid-20thC cars look to us now.
        • by lgw ( 121541 )

          It's really captures the late 70s/early 80s idea of what futuristic trucks would look like. Since I grew up on that stuff, I also think it's cool' Especially the LED light bar on the roof.

      • by Immerman ( 2627577 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @12:21AM (#59455480)

        I thought it was pretty ugly myself. And then I spent some time actually *looking* at the trucks driving around town - and realized that all trucks (and most cars) are actually basically ugly. And the Cybertruck is ugly in a way that's reminiscent of the science fiction style of my youth, so it's got a definite hotline to my inner child.

      • by zmooc ( 33175 )

        Desire for cars is irrational by definition, but if you look at this car with a bit more attention to details, they did so many things so right. Simple things like the position of the wheels and the shape of the fenders and practical things like it being undentable and coming with a compressor, power outlets and a ramp. Given the constraints imposed by the thick body panels and the inspiration from Blade Runner, they did it just right. It is a masterpiece and there's all the rational reason to want it.

      • Is it irrational desire or more like empathy toward a less-fortunate being. People adopt injured, deformed, and abused animals for the same reasons.

    • Take a Cybertruck 250,000 miles through highways, off-roads, and through simple washboarding. How's that window going to hold up to the jarring and vibrations that a work truck is going to go through?

      Or are all the Cybertrucks going to end up as shop displays and city slicker ego extensions?

    • the glass didnt even shatter. it cracked..
  • Though why the back window broke as well isn't clear: the passenger door didn't get whomped by the sledgehammer.

    I think Elon's just making stuff up to hid the real fact - it's not that tough. But rather that worry about armor glass windows, why not put side mirrors on the truck? You know, something required by law...

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      why not put side mirrors on the truck? You know, something required by law...

      Several new cars in fact do NOT have side mirrors, rather cameras only. It's called "virtual side mirrors." Google it.

      https://inteng-storage.s3.amaz... [amazonaws.com]

      • Imagine the possibilities... whereby your rear view reality is what the car says it is. You're a hack away from a Smokey and the Bandit movie... "they even had a bear in the air."

        • In a modern car, your brakes and steering are what the car says it is. (Drive by wire cars are the new standard.) Even if you try to escape the car, the door locks are also what the car says they are.

          Not to hard to believe that the rear/side view cameras are also displays from the car.
      • Please point to a car you can buy today without side view mirrors. FMVSS says you can't do it.
        • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          Audi E-Tron. Available without mirrors in locations where laws allow for it.

          • What localities allow it? They are mandatory in North America and the EU, as well as China, Japan, Taiwan, and most of the rest of Asia. Perhaps you know of an African country that allows new cars to be sold without side mirrors?
            • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

              >Mandatory in EU, Japan...

              They are? News to me. Japan introduced appropriate legislation back in June 2016, and many EU countries followed suit in the same and following year.

              Which is helped by the fact that primary lobbying for this change is done there by Ichikoh and Bosch, the primary corporate players in this field. To surprise of no one, those are Japanese and German corporations respectively.

              And while US is behind here, its companies are jumping on, and there are federal exemptions in US for certai

      • Several new cars in fact do NOT have side mirrors,

        Not in the USA, where actual mirrors are required.

      • Care to mention one model that is approved for the USA?

    • I think Elon's just making stuff up to hid the real fact - it's not that tough.

      I wouldn't be surprised. His comment about the "30X" (I assume he means 300-series) stainless steel being too tough to put in a press without damaging the press gave me pause as well.

      • by Cyberax ( 705495 ) on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:10PM (#59455046)
        It's not just 300-series steel, but it's cryotreated 300-steel. It's much less malleable as a result. It probably can still be stamped for smaller panels, but the presses that Tesla has (or can reasonable acquire commercially) probably are not up to stamping large panels.
        • And this is the big problem with the cybertruck. It's hard to manufacture because of a feature nobody really cares about.

          Expect tweets about 'manufacturing hell'...

        • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          That part sounds moronic to me. We learned long ago that it's better to have proper crumple zones to having a really hard steel shell. Both for safety of those in the vehicle and those outside it.

          There are uses for really hard steel shell on the vehicle (bullet and shrapnel proofing), but those are really bad for everyday vehicle for people who are not targeted by assassins.

      • being too tough to put in a press without damaging the press gave me pause as well.

        He quantified that by saying the thickness Tesla chose (due to the body also being the frame) was the problem with stamping it.

        • by 110010001000 ( 697113 ) on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:32PM (#59455110) Homepage Journal

          Yeah, it was so awesome and strong it couldn't even be stamped. People believe this crap? People really are dumb.

          • Someone commented in another thread that Musk's Reality Distortion Field rivals that of Steve Jobs.

            Seems entirely reasonable.
            • Well whose view do we go with? The guy who sends shit to space and has repeatedly shown to deliver the undeliverable? Or some Known Nutter. Mask's Reality Distortion Field is far better than that of Jobs'. Jobs only affected weak minds. Musk repeatedly demonstrates that people's view of reality is wrong.

              • by jeremyp ( 130771 )

                No he doesn't.

                It wasn't Musk that showed you could build a relatively cheap to operate rocket or an electric that wasn't shit. He's just the person that employs the engineers and designers that did.

                Musk is, in many ways, a fucking idiot. This ball bearing demo is a prime example. Who buys a car with "must be impervious to sledge hammers and ball bearings" in their list of must-have features? Nobody, except maybe the police and the military. If you live in a neighbourhood where people do go round swinging sl

      • Yeah, I agree. Stamping 304 stainless [pacificmet...mpings.com] really isn't that big of a deal, it's done quite often - including in deep draw precision parts [gemmfg.com]. It's more like "we came up with a design we thought was awesome, but the initial feedback sucked so we thought of an excuse"... Just like the glass.
        • I feel like it's a lot easier to reinforce a die for a small part than one the size of a quarter panel, not to mention they are cheaper to replace.
          • No, not really. If you press at the ductility limit of the metal, it's just a matter of size and scale. It's not like 1000 ton presses are uncommon. It's not typically done with big panels because no one is stupid enough to use 30X grade stainless for big panels (there are better materials or corrosion approaches out there).
        • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          You remind me of people who talk about how easy it is to work titanium, and show work done on thin pieces as evidence.

          And then they're stumped at to why US was to horrified to find out that Soviets actually managed to machine submarine hulls out of it. It's so easy to work after all!

          • Huh. How many stamping and tooling shops have you run? I've installed more than a few 500 ton presses, and am used to forging and punching 3/4" plate steel all day long. The reason so few people stamp big pieces of 304 stainless is that it's stupid to use big metal sheets like that. There are better ways to get corrosion resistance on an assembly that uses big panels, than to use 304 stainless sheet. You can easily stamp up to 1/4" thick plate 304 if you want, it's a matter of die size and press weight
            • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

              Oh yeah, normal steel plate is soft and pliable. Stamp it all day. Surface hardened stuff? That's what you have to call people to install a new stamping press for you, because you were dumb enough to try your typical steel press on surface hardened steel "because it's just steel, right?"

              You want to do your usual "fuck Elon" stuff? There's a much better approach than this silliness you're going for. This car body is hardened steel that is far stronger than your typical automotive steels. What did we learn fr

      • I didn't interpret it as "damaging the press", but that the (extremely large) die would wear out too quickly to be economical.
    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      why not put side mirrors on the truck? You know, something required by law...

      You don't go to car shows, do you? Concept cars almost never have side mirrors, as they just look less cool. We'll see what the real thing looks like in a couple years, along with what colors it comes in.

      • Oh, I go to car shows! And most concept cars [google.com] have things like side mirrors and windshield wipers...
      • The Porsche Mission-E concept (now the production Taycan) did not have side mirrors, but used cameras. But on the production car they had to mount actual mirrors. Having mandated backup cameras it's odd that DOT rules can't allow side cameras yet.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Actually, it behaved as such glass is expected. Armor glass is not designed to stay undamaged. It is designed to not let anything through.

      • Not per what Elon said, and what they showed in "redemption" videos. I agree with you, bullet-proof glass is designed to dissipate energy by shattering and distorting, but Elon is flailing here by trying to cover up the stage fiasco with "grasping at straws" explanations and redemption vids.
        • by gweihir ( 88907 )

          Elon probably just has no clue how armor glass actually works. Remember this guy is not an engineer.

    • Talk is Cheap. Elon can talk all he wants.

    • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

      Mirrors are likely copied off some of the newest audis and a few other car makers that incorporated cameras and displays in the vehicle instead. It makes sense, as mirrors add a significant chunk of drag at highway speeds, increasing fuel/energy consumption.

      And yeah, that explanation of the likely PR stunt is just as bullshit as the fact that this stunt was done the way it is. "We hit a door with a sledgehammer which cracked the glass." Great. And the other glass that wasn't in that door got shattered becau

      • Except the FMVSS explicitly requires side mirrors. Can't sell the vehicle in most countries if it doesn't have side mirrors, and there's a reason for that - you can move your head around and get different angles of view from the mirror (which you cannot with a fixed camera).
        • by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

          "FMVSS", "most countries".

          As we have already established before in this thread, your knowledge in this sphere is several years out of date. Several years during which many developed countries have in fact passed legislation to allow mirrorless technologies, and even FMVSS has in fact granted at least one waiver to a US company for mirrorless technology on trucks.

  • Point to the windows during the presentation.
    Use words to tell the world about the windows.
    Move on with the presentation.
    Have 2d art and 3d art ready online describe the luxurious and superior "window" design.
    Never go full windows when doing a presentation.
  • by Eloking ( 877834 ) on Monday November 25, 2019 @10:00PM (#59455002)

    First thing that came into my mind as I read this, what about the rear window? He only hit the front door with the sledgehammer.

  • Personally I believe the engineers forgot to re-calibrate Elon's cyborg body, throwing strength controls
  • submarine mode ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by swell ( 195815 ) <jabberwock@poetic.com> on Monday November 25, 2019 @11:43PM (#59455350)

    I know; you're thinking of the James Bond movies with slick cars that can fly and act as submarines. No, this is about a design problem in the Tesla truck.

    A bulletproof, crashproof car that goes off the bridge into the bay will make for an interesting experience. Will the little escape tool, often sold to drivers, suffice to let the driver escape the car? Will the electric windows open underwater? What strategy is available to escape the vehicle? An impenetrable car has some disadvantages.

    • What strategy is available to escape the vehicle?

      Roll down the windows before crossing bridges.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      There is already a lawsuit against Tesla over the door handles on the S and X making it difficult for people to get passengers out in the event of an accident.

      The handles retract into the door when not in use. In the event of an accident they are supposed to come out but it doesn't always work.

      Emergency services are supposed to break the window and reach in to a car that is on fire to use the internal handles. Anyone without a tool to break the glass is screwed and can't do anything to help the occupants.

    • I actually wondered about this as well. "Unbreakable" windows and a stainless steel body basically means you are SOL if you need the fire department to extract you from your car.
  • One has to wonder why would you put supposedly unbreakable glass on a commercial vehicle for mass market, as being able to break the glass from the inside to provide an escape route after a collision is important, as quite often the doors will not open because they are designed to jamb closed as a measure to prevent passengers being ejected from the vehicle. So unbreakable glass is not safety glass & is not safe as glass
    • To please the CEOs ego, and too look good in demos except when they fuck it up. That people would die from their "advances", has never stopped Tesla in the past.

    • by sad_ ( 7868 )

      not only that, but during an accident it's better for the glass to break when it's being hit instead of a hard surface to smash into.

  • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @01:25AM (#59455624)

    Armor glass is not supposed to stay undamaged on high-force impacts. If it does, that is merely a plus. It is supposed to not splinter and not let anything through and that it did.

    The demonstration was a success, but the demonstrator and audience was incompetent. Not really any surprise.

    • by fatwilbur ( 1098563 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @03:27AM (#59455902)
      How are you supposed to get out of this thing in an accident? Unbreakable windows, that sounds great in case of a fire or submersion in water. And this super strength steel, can it be cut with the jaws of life?
      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Good question. Especially as Tesla batteries have only a limited time after an accident that they remain safe. When an ICE crashed in German a few years back, one of the main problems the rescuers had was getting through the windows. That may well have killed some people in there. This car may not only have the ultimate ugly design, the safety-engineering may also be pretty problematic.

      • by Macthorpe ( 960048 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @04:24AM (#59456016) Journal

        This is the same critique with all of Elon's new transport ideas. Hyperloop, underground tunnels, and now this - I think that he's just obsessed with inescapable metal coffins.

        Also he needs to google "crumple zones". There's a reason why contemporary cars aren't made of hardened materials, and that's because people tend to die on impact if the vehicle can't absorb the force of it.

    • Yes, but a light lob resulted in a hole the size of a golf ball, and most of the rest of the window severely compromised.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Did the hole actually go through? Also, while it may look bad, real armor glass can still take a lot of punishment in that state.

  • I want strong glass on my phone in case I drop it, not on my car in case someone starts shooting at me. It just adds to the cost of the vehicle and perhaps adds more weight and one of those things is much more likely than the other.

    If you spend $500 for a phone, should the screen really break if dropped from 3 feet? Thanks Google! (Pixel 3a XL - it comes with "DragonTrail" glass). I guess it's my fault for not researching it better before I bought it.

  • Having reinforced, laminated side windows in a car is a monumentally dumb idea from a safety point of view. If Tesla wanted to sell "armor glass" for this vehicle they should have made it an opt-in option and slathered it with disclaimers and waivers because I guarantee somebody will die because of it.
  • That really was not a very had hit from teh hammer, would the car not encounter even more violent vibrations while driving down any unpaved or pothole strewn road?

  • Aren't car parts required to crumple to comply with safety regulations?

  • by ThomasBHardy ( 827616 ) on Tuesday November 26, 2019 @09:41AM (#59456590)

    The sledgehammer struck the front door.

    So if we are believing the narrative, this caused the glass in the back, not part of that door that was hit, to crack easily as well?

    Just admit you screwed up and it's not as tough as you thought or that you messed up the glass in the prototype in some way and move on. Don't create lies to hide behind.

    • by Chas ( 5144 )

      Set a plastic bag on a counter.
      Now take one finger and try to poke a hole in it in a single sharp jab.

      Now, hold the bag tightly, and try to poke a hole in it again.

      That's essentially what happened.

      The hit didn't really affect the panel on the front. But it probably tweaked the door and frame enough to put the windows under tension.

      Add some additional stress and *POP!*

      Please note: I'm NOT a Musk fanboy or a Tesla fanboy.
      Musk is mostly a shyster, touting use of existing tech to implement decades-old ideas as

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • "Divisive design?" Really?

  • Wanna bet they were NOT the hardened glass windows they were purported to be, probably because they were not available for the accelerated schedule of the presentation -- but nobody told Musk? laughing.
  • In the slow motion video, I saw of the practice, the door was cushioned by towels. When the ball hit the window, the ball bounced off, and the door bounced open a couple inches.

    The reason the ball broke the window on stage was the window was held in a much more rigid frame and there was no place to flex.

    That said.....

    Most trucks sold in the US use tempered glass for the side windows. If you throw a ball at them, they are going to shatter into a thousand pieces, and the ball is going to end up in the driv

  • The car was developed by Apple engineers! ;P
  • Probably because the hit from the sledge tweaked the entire door frame assembly and put the glass under tension.
    So it wouldn't have the "give" it normally would.

    Think about holding a plastic bag. Hold it loose and it's kinda hard to just spontaneously poke a hole in it with a finger.

    Hold it tight like a drum and it's easy...

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...