Automatic doors of any kind are a big hazard. I saw a Tesla SUV’s gullwing door slowly closing with a little boy playing underneath. The tip of the door was about to come down right on the child’s mushy cranium when he looked up, saw the door, and darted out of the way.
There is, power windows in cars have had it for over 20+ years or so, for safety, so kids/dogs don't strangle themselves with the windows.
It's a 1 cent shunt used for monitoring the current consumption of the motor. If the current spikes, it means something jammed it(or it reached the top/bottom) and the microcontroller will cut power to the window lifting motor.
Maybe Tesla can look into that cutting edge tech once they wrap up humanoid robots.
It seems bizarre to me that they wouldn’t have that sensor, I wonder if maybe it’s because they somehow didn’t calibrate properly for the force at the top angle?
I don’t have/want to cybertruck, but I wonder if it would stop properly if you were to have something at the bottom blocking it.
But Tesla loves "innovations" that are just an excuse to vertically integrate in an inferior manner. That's stuff like the "superbottle" which integrates a bunch of parts you could normally replace independently with common parts into one (super easy to integrate on the assembly line) package
> ...and the microcontroller will cut power to the window lifting motor.
Usually the controller will reverse the motor instead of just cutting it. You want the window or door to stop strangling the cat, not just do it somewhat more slowly.
source: experimentation with power windows and doors, garage doors and similar objects. I actually started doing this after a misadjusted garage door strangled one of our cats.
I apologize, but I’m not sure I understand what point you’re making here?
It seems like such a strange comment- surely there is a gulf of difference between a commercial robot that will be interacted with by a few trained factory workers and something which is sold to everyday people and on public streets right?
Can you elaborate more on the comparison you’re trying to draw?
I am trying to take it in good faith, but I’m genuinely at a loss trying to understand what you’re going for.
"Most vehicles that have features like automatic closing doors, trunks, etc, have sensors that will detect and stop doors from closing if something like an extremity is detected in the gap. The Cybertruck doesn’t appear to have that around the frunk’s edges, allowing the door to completely close on the veggies. Imagining your finger in there is enough to give anyone pause. The truck does have a censor for the front of the frunk’s door, but not on the pointy, smashy sides."
In the video clip at the top of the article, the carrot is placed at the location closest to the window. Given the location of the hinge for the closing mechanism, this is the place where the hinge has the maximum mechanical advantage. The torque imposed on the motor from the load required to smash the carrot is minimized at this location, and any load-sensing feature designed to prevent this sort of injury would have the most difficult time detecting the load here.
The best comparison for an automatically closing tailgate on other cars would be at the very top of the tailgate. I would like to see this comparison. Comparisons made with carrots placed in other locations are not quite as similar.
The risk also depends on where the potential pinch point is. I doubt that many people put their hand on the top of the roof when the tailgate closes. The Cybertruck's danger zone is exactly where you would put your hand if you were leaning against the car.
It is also debatable how much damage a normal tailgate would do. I have seen several fingers pinched in fully closed car doors and have done it myself at least once. It hurt, but no fingers were chopped off. The latch and door material have enough give to allow space for relatively unhurt fingers. The single sheet metal of the Cybertruck's bonnet looks very sturdy, much to the chagrin of trapped fingers.
It would certainly be possible to increase the safety of the bonnet while maintaining the design and choice of materials. This would probably require a more complex hinge. The bonnet could close normally, but leave a uniform gap of a few centimetres and then pull itself closed. The load sensors would sense resistance equally on each edge and detect any misplaced fingers.
When you have a billionaire CEO who fires people at random like cartoonish figures, espouses antisemitism and conspiracy theories reminiscent of Henry Ford, and names their kids random letters, you know they don't care about fit, finish, quality, or safety... only about being "right".
24 comments
[ 172 ms ] story [ 1726 ms ] thread(This is not satire — it actually happened.)
It's a 1 cent shunt used for monitoring the current consumption of the motor. If the current spikes, it means something jammed it(or it reached the top/bottom) and the microcontroller will cut power to the window lifting motor.
Maybe Tesla can look into that cutting edge tech once they wrap up humanoid robots.
I don’t have/want to cybertruck, but I wonder if it would stop properly if you were to have something at the bottom blocking it.
If you get pinched close to the hinge your reaction won't generate a lot of torque on the motor, it will be less than the weight of the trunk itself.
Take their power seats not stopping for obstructions: most auto manufacturers do not make their own power seat modules.
They buy those from suppliers like Bosch and Continental (yes, the tire guys): https://www.continental-automotive.com/en/components/seat-co...
But Tesla loves "innovations" that are just an excuse to vertically integrate in an inferior manner. That's stuff like the "superbottle" which integrates a bunch of parts you could normally replace independently with common parts into one (super easy to integrate on the assembly line) package
Usually the controller will reverse the motor instead of just cutting it. You want the window or door to stop strangling the cat, not just do it somewhat more slowly.
source: experimentation with power windows and doors, garage doors and similar objects. I actually started doing this after a misadjusted garage door strangled one of our cats.
It seems like such a strange comment- surely there is a gulf of difference between a commercial robot that will be interacted with by a few trained factory workers and something which is sold to everyday people and on public streets right?
Can you elaborate more on the comparison you’re trying to draw?
I am trying to take it in good faith, but I’m genuinely at a loss trying to understand what you’re going for.
[1] anti-theft system: https://w.wiki/9dDE
[2] flip-flop detector: https://w.wiki/9dDF
"Most vehicles that have features like automatic closing doors, trunks, etc, have sensors that will detect and stop doors from closing if something like an extremity is detected in the gap. The Cybertruck doesn’t appear to have that around the frunk’s edges, allowing the door to completely close on the veggies. Imagining your finger in there is enough to give anyone pause. The truck does have a censor for the front of the frunk’s door, but not on the pointy, smashy sides."
In the video clip at the top of the article, the carrot is placed at the location closest to the window. Given the location of the hinge for the closing mechanism, this is the place where the hinge has the maximum mechanical advantage. The torque imposed on the motor from the load required to smash the carrot is minimized at this location, and any load-sensing feature designed to prevent this sort of injury would have the most difficult time detecting the load here.
The best comparison for an automatically closing tailgate on other cars would be at the very top of the tailgate. I would like to see this comparison. Comparisons made with carrots placed in other locations are not quite as similar.
Still bad safety, just an interesting aside.
It is also debatable how much damage a normal tailgate would do. I have seen several fingers pinched in fully closed car doors and have done it myself at least once. It hurt, but no fingers were chopped off. The latch and door material have enough give to allow space for relatively unhurt fingers. The single sheet metal of the Cybertruck's bonnet looks very sturdy, much to the chagrin of trapped fingers.
It would certainly be possible to increase the safety of the bonnet while maintaining the design and choice of materials. This would probably require a more complex hinge. The bonnet could close normally, but leave a uniform gap of a few centimetres and then pull itself closed. The load sensors would sense resistance equally on each edge and detect any misplaced fingers.