Connect with us

News

Tesla patents novel hood hinge that optimizes pedestrian safety during collisions

The Model X is Tesla's largest vehicle in its current lineup. (Credit: nick.lauer via My Tesla Adventure/Instagram)

Published

on

Tesla’s electric cars are known for being extremely quick, and they are also known for being extremely safe. The Model 3, the company’s most affordable car to date, for example, has aced safety ratings across the globe, earning a 5-Star rating from the NHTSA in the US, the Euro NCAP in Europe, and the ANCAP in Australia. Even the IIHS gave the Tesla Model 3 its highest rating, Top Safety Pick+. 

But this is Tesla, and the electric car maker is known for being a company that refuses to stay still. Its cars are already quick enough to give passengers serious Gs while launching, yet the company remains hard at work on making them even quicker and more visceral in terms of speed (e.g. the Model S Plaid Powertrain). In the same light, while Teslas are already safe at their current state, it is no surprise that the company remains dedicated to finding ways to make its vehicles even safer, both for passengers in the cabin and for pedestrians on the road.

One such example of this was highlighted in a recently published patent that was simply titled “Hinge Assembly for a Vehicle Hood.” Based on the electric car maker’s discussion, the novel hinge assembly has the potential to protect pedestrians who happen to hit the vehicle’s hood during a collision. Similar systems are in place in vehicles today, though Tesla maintained that conventional designs have lots of areas for improvement. 

A side view of Tesla’s hinge assembly. (Credit: US Patent Office)

“Modern vehicles are mandated by safety standards to protect pedestrians from head-impact injuries, including a scenario in which a pedestrian would contact the vehicle’s hood. To meet these requirements. Current state of the art safety systems are active systems that typically include a sensor system to detect a collision with pedestrian and fire (using a pyrotechnic) an actuator to lift the front hood into a protective position before pedestrian impact. However, such systems may be falsely triggered and can only be used once because the pyrotechnic is not reversible. The pyrotechnic is also expensive, adding to overall cost of the vehicle. Therefore, there is a need for a safety system that overcomes the aforementioned drawbacks.”

Tesla noted in its patent’s description that its hinge assembly includes a body member and a hood member, with the latter being “pivotally coupled with a body member through a pivot pin.” In the event of a collision, a portion of the vehicle’s hood member or body member “deforms such that the hood member or body member disengages from the pivot pin.” This allows Tesla to use the hinge as a passive pedestrian safety system that does not require any additional components such as sensors or controllers. The design outlined in Tesla’s patent is also more practical than the pyrotechnic system used in conventional pedestrian impact safety systems. 

Tesla describes how its hood hinge works in a collision in the following section. 

A side view of Tesla’s shows the hinge assembly being impacted by a pedestrian head. (Credit: US Patent Office)

“FIG. 6 illustrates impact of a headform 602 on hinge assembly 116. Headform 602 represents the head (or portion thereof) of a pedestrian or other living being. As illustrated, when a collision occurs such that headform 602 hits a portion of hood member 108 of vehicle 100 along direction of an axis X-X′, a force is generated. When the force is great enough, the impact force causes hood member 108 to disengage from hinge assembly 116. The impact force typically causes deformation of portion 314 of hood member 108 adjacent to notch 312 such that pivot pin 202 disengages with second opening 304 of hood member 108. In embodiments, the width W of notch 312 is altered to change the impact force at which the hood member 108 disengages from hood member 108. In embodiments the impact force causes deformation of the pivot pin 202 to allow disengagement of hood member 108 from body member 110.

“In an event of collision, hood member 108 may disengage with hinge assembly 116 such that safety standards can be met. Hood member 108 may move down due to impact force and disengagement with hinge assembly 116. To allow movement of hood member 108, sufficient space may be provided by trimming away portions of hood member 108 and body member 110. Advantageously, this would lower weight of components while maintaining the safety standards for vehicle 100.”

Advertisement
-

Tesla is a carmaker that will likely never stay still. Despite its significant lead in the electric car segment thanks to its vehicles’ batteries and powertrain, Tesla is in a continuous process of improvement. The hood hinge outlined in this patent might be quite simple, but it contributes to the overall safety of Tesla’s lineup of vehicles nonetheless. Such initiatives, if any, further prove that when it comes to safety, no part is too small for innovation — and in the event of a collision, it’s these factors that can make all the difference. 

Tesla’s patent for its hinge assembly could be accessed below. 

Tesla Hood Patent by Simon Alvarez on Scribd

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

Lifestyle

Tesla Cybercab and Robotaxi’s real advantage won’t be the ride service

Published

on

By

Concept art of a Tesla Cybercab in Las Vegas Strip as rendered via Grok

For a century, the car has asked the same thing of its owner, which is basically to pay attention. Even the best ride-hailing app like Uber or Lyft only moved the problem into someone else’s hands. You stopped driving, but you still sat in a stranger’s car, while half listening, and wondering whether to take a phone call in the car without being rude. The Cybercab has no wheel, no pedals and no driver. With Grok @bot now live inside it, it becomes something else entirely, and I think that matters more than the fleet count that everyone is tracking.

Grok @bot is an agent, not a voice assistant. A rider signs in once, and from then on can say what they need and watch it happen. Order dinner from a favorite restaurant. Fill the grocery cart. Move money, answer email, adjust a calendar, push a work project forward. Tesla engineer Yun-Ta Tsai confirmed it is enabled across every Cybercab and the rest of the Model Y fleet, and Tesla’s own pitch is that Full Self-Driving handles the commute while Grok handles the errands.

Think about what that does to a thirty minute ride. Uber sells you a trip, while Waymo sells you the same trip in a more private setting. Tesla is selling the thirty minutes themselves, returned to you with an assistant attached. Errands that used to eat a Saturday get done between pickup and drop off. The ride stops being dead time between two places and becomes a place of its own.

Tesla integrates Grok Bot into its vehicles for the ultimate personal assistant

Best of all, your Bots follow you into any Cybercab, and presumably your own Tesla, then logs you out automatically when you step out. Anyone can bolt a chatbot onto a screen, but much harder to own the vehicle, the autonomy stack and the assistant at once. It also quietly ties SpaceX’s Super Intelligence business to Tesla’s fleet, after Tesla converted its xAI stake into SpaceX equity. The relationship between those two companies is getting harder to describe as separate.

This is also where the hard questions start, because an agent that can spend your money in a vehicle other people also ride in needs some answers. How does it handle a voice it shouldn’t trust? What gets recorded, who can see it, and for how long? What happens when a rider leaves halfway through a task?

Advertisement
-

If Tesla gets those answers right, the scoreboard changes. We have been counting Cybercabs and wait times. The more telling number may be what riders accomplish per trip. That is data almost no one else will ever have, and it is the real reason to watch Grok @bot.

What do you think? Leave me a comment.

Continue Reading

News

Why Elon Musk’s target date for buying an Optimus robot is harder than it sounds

Musk says China’s magnet export ban cost Optimus months, and robot hands remain shockingly hard.

Published

on

By

Concept rendering of Tesla Optimus in mass production

Elon Musk says China’s export curbs on magnets used in electric motors set back Tesla’s Optimus program by two to three months, and that the robot’s hands remain the hardest part of the project. He made the comments Saturday during a live interview with Tesla Owners Silicon Valley at the X Takeover event at Giga Texas, in front of roughly 2,000 attendees. The Optimus discussion begins around the 49 minute mark of the stream.

On the hands, Musk was blunt and noted that a general purpose humanoid needs fine motor skills that are “incredibly difficult to get right. Shockingly difficult,” he said in the interview. He pointed to a problem he says no one has demonstrated yet: “One of the hardest things also generally is to do precision and force at the same time,” such as driving a small self tapping screw into wood. Touch sensors add another layer, since it is “actually kind of hard to get touch sensors that elastically deform and can handle high cycle life and it won’t just break after a few thousand cycles.”

He also took aim at rival robot videos. “Any complicated looking robot demo, it’s a canned demo. It’s not real,” Musk said, adding that real AI means showing a robot something it has never seen and watching it still cope, the way FSD handles a city it has never driven.

Musk expects the Optimus ramp to be slower than a new vehicle production ramp. “The initial part of that S curve of production ramp is going to be very slow at the beginning,” Musk said, partly because “unlike cars, there’s no pre existing supply chain for robot stuff.” That echoes his July reply on X that Optimus production “will be extremely slow at first, as everything is new.”

The magnet disclosure puts a number on a problem Musk first raised in 2025. He said China “prevented the export of magnets for use in electric motors” and that it “set back the Optimus program by like two or three months.” Then he added: “We had robots with no arms.” Tesla’s fix is to bring the supply chain home. “You’ve got to be able to make all the parts domestically,” he said. Teslarati reported in April 2025 that Musk tied the issue to permanent magnets in the arm actuators, where motors have to be as small as possible.

Advertisement
-

Tesla Optimus V3 hand and arm details revealed in new patents

Production is moving regardless, with a reported internal goal of more than 1,000 a week by the end of 2026. Teslarati recently covered how Tesla is certifying supply partners in China for Optimus parts, while the company’s hand design has been the subject of new patent filings.

Musk has said he wants Optimus available to the public by late 2027, though Tesla has not confirmed that date or published updated production figures.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Elon Musk drops a Thanksgiving hint about Starship’s biggest test yet

Elon Musk says Starship Flight 15 will try to catch the ship itself, a first.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk says SpaceX’s next Starship flight will try something nobody has done before, by catching the ship itself. Speaking to roughly 2,000 people at the X Takeover event at Giga Texas on Saturday, Musk said Flight 15 is about four to six weeks away and “probably launches a little bit before Thanksgiving, is my guess.”

That is a slip from earlier reporting, which had pointed to a launch as early as October 19. Musk explained why the date keeps moving. “We’re making a bunch of improvements to the rocket between every flight,” he said, adding that there are often hundreds, sometimes thousands, of small changes. This time the list is short, “but some of them take a fair bit of work and we’ve got to go inside the tank to make some of these changes.”

“We’re going to try to catch the ship, which is a super big deal,” Musk said. “If we do so, that’ll be the first time that there’s been full recovery of an orbital class rocket.” SpaceX has already caught the Super Heavy booster with the tower’s mechanical arms, and has talked about catching the ship since late 2025, but the upper stage has never been caught.

Musk also laid out what comes after. “The next big milestone would be to refly both the booster and the ship,” he said, describing a Flight 16 where “all parts of an orbital rocket are reflown.”

The reason SpaceX wants this comes down to cost and cadence. Every Starship ship so far has ended its flight in the ocean, and SpaceX expects most of those water landings to end in fireballs. A ship that returns to Starbase intact can be inspected and flown again. SpaceX’s IPO filing, says Starship V3 is designed to deliver 100 metric tons to orbit in a fully reusable configuration, that SpaceX aims to cut the cost to reach orbit by 99% or more versus the historical average, and that tower catches should allow “multiple launches per day.”

Advertisement
-

The payoff goes beyond cheaper launches. The next generation Starlink V3 satellites are too large for Falcon 9 and can only fly on Starship, which can carry up to 60 per flight. Flight 14 on September 28 deployed the first 26 of them after Starship reached orbit despite an early engine shutdown, as Teslarati reported. Musk blamed engine computer software, and said the heat shield “was extremely robust,” which he claimed in August had solved Starship’s biggest challenge.

NASA’s Moon plans depend on the same capability. NASA’s inspector general has described a lander mission that needs a propellant depot in low Earth orbit and more than 10 tanker flights, with SpaceX targeting one tanker launch every six days. That schedule only works if ships and boosters come back fast and fly again. Also, ship to ship propellant transfer has not been attempted yet.

One interesting hurdle yet to be explored is bringing the ship back to the launch site, with reentry over land, which will undoubtedly come with a lot of aviation safety reviews.

Continue Reading