this is not what crash test should test, but still good for protecting battery, so when designing the upper part engineers can concentrate on saving people inside as battery down there is already protected.
2 дні тому+1
I was thinking the same thing, the driver would not survive. On the other hand, you are likely to die in a 120kph crash in any scenarip I gues....
there are few pictures of volvo xc90 after same crash, they say that none of people died inside. in some cases people can survive a lot of G force. in F1 there were several cases with 50G and nothing is even broken, while car is almost destroyed.
For passengers, do you think this Bedrock Chassis is more safer option? or it just protects batteries and potentially worse off for passenger injuries/fatalities?
Finally somebody who will take safety of cars to a whole new level. Glad such tests are done. Wish someone in India had the courage to take such tests. We are still testing with 64 kmph which is nothing to the legal speed in highways.
The pole test with the chassis is flawed. The actual car would weigh much more and translate to a different outcome. Perhaps the additional structure mitigates this partly but we should be looking to the crashtested full car.
nobody's talking about the occupants (full size plastic dummies improvising as real world passengers) in the crash test . . . no mention of how the crash dummies reacted in the post crash analysis . . . in order to better understand the human body & it's level of tolerance . . .
@hodanghau596 it is very much the job of CATL to provide a full analysis of the crash test . . . afterall CATL is the one conducting the crash tests . . .
does it matter? which would you prefer to be? one where the front crushes up to to the back of your head or this? If you are going to have an accident at 120kmh, i think you want to be in this at the least
There’s no driver and passengers and trunk load. Add approximately and increase the weight around 1tonne please. Also there are some situations BEV can pull trailers upto 3tonnes
Technically not impressive…it is very easy to desgin a stiff chassis frame. The Problem is that by the increased stiffness the forces for occupants inside the vehicle rises to a intolerant level. Mercedes develope the first passenger vehicle with crumpel zone. So the real Engineering art is to combine a stiff passenger cabine with „weak“ crumple zone to reduce the energy of the impact. The CATL construction looks like a ledder frame of an old SUV. The crash test does not take into account the real packaging of an electric vehicle. Front engine auxiliary units (EAC, DCDC) in the front area are completely missing
Thats really cool... But also colossally unrealistic. Virtually no accidents are going to be from 75mph to an instant dead stop. Still, I do appreciate good engineering 😊
How about human safety? Is it meaningfully safer to the passengers than existing chassis? I worry its over-optimized to pass the 120km/h test but actually a lot more fatal for passengers.
Yes the survivability at 120 km/h is very slim, if there's any. But atleast responders can evacuate the victim(s) and get rid of the wreck from traffic safely due to lower fire risk.
Setting new crash and safety standard..bravo
Well done. On Spain we are looking forward to see your factory on Zaragoza 🎉
Pretty impressive, great work.
Congratulations 👏🏻
this is not what crash test should test, but still good for protecting battery, so when designing the upper part engineers can concentrate on saving people inside as battery down there is already protected.
I was thinking the same thing, the driver would not survive. On the other hand, you are likely to die in a 120kph crash in any scenarip I gues....
there are few pictures of volvo xc90 after same crash, they say that none of people died inside. in some cases people can survive a lot of G force. in F1 there were several cases with 50G and nothing is even broken, while car is almost destroyed.
For passengers, do you think this Bedrock Chassis is more safer option? or it just protects batteries and potentially worse off for passenger injuries/fatalities?
what???? with NO DEFORMATION on A Pliar and door wit such weight at 120kmh? are u an 1d10t?
CATL is a battery company. It does make sense if they are concentrated in battery topic
Amazing test and result 👏
> for every 1 km/h increase, injury risk increases 3%
> for every 5 km/h increase, injury risk increases ~100%
How does that make any sense?
bruh it's called exponential increase bro, not everything in this world is linear.
interesting how they came out with this after the defence departments declaration
@@CarsEditsShorts What exactly about `f(x) = x + 0,03x` seems exponential to you?
Inertia!
Finally somebody who will take safety of cars to a whole new level. Glad such tests are done. Wish someone in India had the courage to take such tests. We are still testing with 64 kmph which is nothing to the legal speed in highways.
Thanks, we have high hopes.
Looks like quite promising platform, can't wait to see it on production model
120kmph is impressive 👏
Great safety features!
Now this is called leading! Great presentation, while the rest of the world just dicks around
Great, wondering if the battery pack is serviceable like tesla
CATLs excellent batteries and chassis + Lucids amazing electric motors would be the best and most efficient electric car ever!
The pole test with the chassis is flawed. The actual car would weigh much more and translate to a different outcome. Perhaps the additional structure mitigates this partly but we should be looking to the crashtested full car.
That's the reason they did it like this 😅
The Changan Avatar car already build with "Bedrock Chassis"
Nice! Wonderful job, can't imagine having such robust crash structure for ICE cars!
This is amazing!!
Chinese Engineer are so young. Golden era is coming
How's about side and rear impact crash safety?
nobody's talking about the occupants (full size plastic dummies improvising as real world passengers) in the crash test . . . no mention of how the crash dummies reacted in the post crash analysis . . . in order to better understand the human body & it's level of tolerance . . .
This scenario is not survivable. This is all about preventing further harm caused by fire.
That is the job of auto manufacturers, not CATL's. CATL is a battery company, and it ensures that battery packs survive.
@hodanghau596 it is very much the job of CATL to provide a full analysis of the crash test . . . afterall CATL is the one conducting the crash tests . . .
does it matter? which would you prefer to be? one where the front crushes up to to the back of your head or this? If you are going to have an accident at 120kmh, i think you want to be in this at the least
catl only provides chassis
They aren’t carmakers
There’s no driver and passengers and trunk load. Add approximately and increase the weight around 1tonne please. Also there are some situations BEV can pull trailers upto 3tonnes
The driver and front passenger died but the battery is safe 😂
love to see china's innovation going so fast
nice... crash test should have atleast 120kmph speed bcz most crashes happen at this speed and not at 60
Good
everyone in the car is completely dead but the battery is ok! huzzah!
Only god can save you if you crash in 120
Better than having the victims burnt beyond recognition.
@@SpyOnTheWeb God save the battery. The national anthem of Robot nation.
Now let's see the Lexus LS 400😂 surprising Chinese technology nowadays 😮
Nice, now DO THE NAIL TEST
1km/hr increase is 3% while 5km/hr increase is 100%? I don't think that math checks out....
for every 1km/h = 3%
for every 5km/h = nearly double
You can listen again.
@@arhitectura.din.România Yup, I did listen again. I still think it is wrong...
With no machine block, the car will have space to stengthen front area
Is RWD testing car?
Technically not impressive…it is very easy to desgin a stiff chassis frame. The Problem is that by the increased stiffness the forces for occupants inside the vehicle rises to a intolerant level.
Mercedes develope the first passenger vehicle with crumpel zone.
So the real Engineering art is to combine a stiff passenger cabine with „weak“ crumple zone to reduce the energy of the impact.
The CATL construction looks like a ledder frame of an old SUV.
The crash test does not take into account the real packaging of an electric vehicle. Front engine auxiliary units (EAC, DCDC) in the front area are completely missing
BYD is the next Kodak
Thats really cool... But also colossally unrealistic. Virtually no accidents are going to be from 75mph to an instant dead stop.
Still, I do appreciate good engineering 😊
It's looking at the extremes. If the battery survives a 75 mph pole crash, it should survive anything it's likely to see on the street.
How many million dollars does such a car cost?
Tesla already does this. Cheapest Tesla is about $20K Model 3 after savings. Or $40K upfront.
@@AlenMop Chinese ev cars are much better
@@nilurrea2689 which one do you own?
@@nilurrea2689 what car do you drive?
who gives a pluk about the car, what forces did the occupants experience?
How about human safety?
Is it meaningfully safer to the passengers than existing chassis?
I worry its over-optimized to pass the 120km/h test but actually a lot more fatal for passengers.
Operation is successful patient dead.
this is a battery company, passengers safety is not their business,they only care about will the battery blow up.
formula 1 drivers survive such crashes just bcz their cabin is strong and they crashes at more than 200kmph
East rising
If you think you can buy a S class dual tone in 26 L, you deserve to be scammed
silly test. for head on crashes there is a limit for survival around 70km/h.
There was
Yes the survivability at 120 km/h is very slim, if there's any. But atleast responders can evacuate the victim(s) and get rid of the wreck from traffic safely due to lower fire risk.
I must be living under a rock because I thought catl was a battery Manufacturer not an auto manufacturer
They are not manufacturing cars, just the platform with the battery for other manufacturers.
They sell battery solution package.
Yes😂