Connect with us

News

Tesla patent points to battery cell improvements with clever deformation detection process

Tesla's 2170 battery cells. (Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

A recent patent published late August has revealed that Tesla is working on a monitoring system and apparatus that will allow the electric car maker to detect deformations in battery cells in a more effective manner. 

Tesla’s patent application, titled “Apparatus and Method for Detection of Deformation in Battery Cells,” notes that battery cycle life is among the most crucial parameters to ensure optimal performance in machines such as electric vehicles and energy storage devices. Over the course of their lifetime, battery cells will be subjected to multiple charge and discharge cycles, at times in vastly varying conditions and environments.  

As noted by the company in its patent application, there are instances when cells operate in an environment where the ambient temperature may intermittently surge to levels above the stable thermal temperature for normal operations. Cells could also be subjected to high charge and discharge rates and large periodic loads, which could result in significant heating, among other reactions. 

Subjected to these factors, battery cells could experience several effects, such as the thickening of electrodes or the volume expansion of electrochemically active materials within the cell itself. These expansions could ultimately result in cells experiencing deformation, which could, in turn, result in both reversible and irreversible mechanical strain, as well as the potential degradation of the battery’s electrodes. 

Advertisement
An illustration depicting Tesla’s apparatus and method for detecting deformations in battery cells. (Credit: US Patent Office)

These battery cell deformations are traditionally monitored using strain gauges or optical gauges that exclusively detect and evaluate deformations at single points in a cell. Tesla noted that this system has space for improvements, since optical evaluations might not provide the correct status of deformation across the entire surface of a battery. This could result in strain and deformation measurements that are inaccurate. 

With these factors in mind, Tesla has come up with a deformation detection apparatus that enables the contactless detection of deformations and/or swelling of the battery across the entire surface of the cell itself. Tesla describes the deformation detection apparatus as follows. 

“A deformation detection apparatus includes a cell movement-control assembly to handle a linear motion and a rotational motion of a battery cell, a body that supports the cell movement-control assembly, a digital micrometer, and control circuitry. The control circuitry controls a displacement of the battery cell between a first position and a second position along a longitudinal axis through a scanning region of the digital micrometer and a plurality of rotational positions of the battery cell at a plurality of charge states and a plurality of discharge states. The control circuitry measures a plurality of outer diameter values of the battery cell for a plurality of linear positions and a plurality of rotational positions along the longitudinal axis of the battery cell and determines a change in a geometrical shape (deformation and/or strain) of the battery cell for the plurality of linear positions and the plurality of rotational positions.”

An illustration depicting Tesla’s apparatus and method for detecting deformations in battery cells. (Credit: US Patent Office)

According to the electric car maker, the battery cell deformation monitoring process outlined in its patent will provide advantages over traditional monitoring methods. 

“The disclosed apparatus, such as the apparatus 100 and method of determination of deformations in the battery cell 112 advantageously provides a contactless solution for deformation detection in the battery cells, as compared to conventional contact-based solutions. Further, instead of measuring the plurality of outer diameter values/strain values at a specific point in time, the disclosed apparatus 100 advantageously facilitates measurement of the plurality of outer diameter values/strain values at a plurality of points on the battery cell 112. The apparatus 100 enables detection of localized/non-localized deformation regions on the battery cell 112, which may exhibit signs of deformation at different charge/discharge states at different points in time.”

Tesla’s recently published patent application for its new battery cell deformation detection apparatus could be accessed in full here

Advertisement

The implications of Tesla’s recent patent are notable. By adopting its deformation detection system, the company would be able to evaluate the quality of its cells and their operating limits more effectively. This could open the doors to improvements in the company’s batteries, which could, in turn, result in even more range and performance for Tesla’s electric vehicles. 

Tesla holds a notable lead among automakers in terms of battery technology, as exhibited by the company’s electric vehicles’ vastly superior range compared to the competition. This is represented by Tesla’s recent “Raven” update to the 100 kWh Model X, which allowed the SUV to travel 325 miles in one charge. This is notably impressive, considering that the Audi e-tron, a smaller, lighter vehicle equipped with a 95 kWh battery pack (5% smaller than the Model X), is only EPA-rated for 204 miles per charge (38% less range than Tesla’s larger, heavier vehicle). A report from German business newspaper Wirtschaftswoche has also determined that Tesla’s batteries for the Model 3 have over four times less cobalt compared to the batteries utilized by Volkswagen today.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Energy

Tesla’s newest “Folding V4 Superchargers” are key to its most aggressive expansion yet

Tesla’s folding V4 Supercharger ships 33% more per truck, cuts deployment time and cost significantly.

Published

on

By

Tesla V4 Supercharger installation ramping in Europe

Tesla is rolling out a folding V4 Supercharger design, an engineering change that allows 33% more units to fit on a single delivery truck, cuts deployment time in half, and reduces overall installation cost by roughly 20%.

The folding mechanism addresses one of the least glamorous but most consequential bottlenecks in charging infrastructure: getting hardware from factory floor to job site efficiently. By collapsing the form factor for transit and unfolding into an operational configuration on arrival, the new design dramatically reduces the logistics overhead that has historically slowed Supercharger rollouts, particularly at large or remote sites where multiple units are needed simultaneously.

The timing aligns with a broader acceleration in Tesla’s network strategy. In March 2026, Tesla’s Gigafactory New York produced its final V3 Supercharger cabinet after more than seven years and 15,000 units, pivoting entirely to V4 cabinet production. The V4 cabinet itself is already a generational leap, delivering up to 500 kW per stall for passenger vehicles and up to 1.2 MW for the Tesla Semi, while supporting twice the stalls per cabinet at three times the power density of its predecessor. The folding transport innovation layers logistical efficiency on top of that technical foundation.

Tesla launches first ‘true’ East Coast V4 Supercharger: here’s what that means

Tesla Charging’s Director Max de Zegher, commenting on the V4 cabinet when it launched, captured the operational philosophy behind these changes: “Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.” The design philosophy has always been about maximizing real-world throughput, not just peak specs, and the folding transport upgrade extends that thinking into the supply chain itself.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead

The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.

Published

on

By

The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.

On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.

Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption

Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.

The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.

The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.

The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss

A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.

Published

on

elon musk
Ministério Das Comunicações, CC BY 2.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.

The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.

The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.

Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package

The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”

The New York Post initially reported the story.

A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.

McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:

“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”

The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.

McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.

The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.

Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.

After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.

Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.

The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.

Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.

A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.

Continue Reading