首页  >>  来自播客: The Limiting Factor 更新   反馈

Tesla's Rare Earth Free Motor // Niron Iron Nitride or Ferrite Magnets?

发布时间 2023-05-10 15:00:33    来源

摘要

At Investor Day, Tesla teased a rare earth free motor. This has led to spculation about Tesla partnering with Niron for their Iron Nitride material. However, I think think humble ferrite magnets may actually be a better option. Let me know what you think in the comments below. Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thelimitingfactor Paypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/limitingfactor42069 Teespring: https://teespring.com/stores/the-limiting-factor Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/TLFBatteries/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/LimitingThe *Timeline* 0:00 Introduction 01:00 What is a Rare Earth? 02:20 Why Remove Rare Earths? 03:09 Why did Tesla Use Rare Earths? 05:24 Niron Iron Nitride Magnets 11:42 'Tesla' Magnets 14:20 Tesla Ferrite Motor 23:45 Summary Intro Music by Dyalla: Homer Said

GPT-4正在为你翻译摘要中......

中英文字稿  

Welcome back everyone, I'm Jordan Gisegi, and this is the limiting factor. One of the biggest surprises of investor day was Tesla's claim that the motor and their next generation platform will be using no rare earth metals. I see three pathways for Tesla to do that. First, by using next generation iron nitride magnets from Niron Magnetics. Second, by developing their own in-house magnet material with their world class materials team. And third, by leveraging their in-house software to develop a motor using cheap, low-strength fairite magnets instead. As you can guess by the thumbnail, my money is on the fairite magnets. So today, I'm going to walk you through how I came to that conclusion. Before we begin, a special thanks to my Patreon supporters and YouTube members. This is the support that gives me the freedom to avoid chasing the algorithm and sponsors. As always, the links for support are in the description.
大家好，欢迎回来，我是乔丹·吉塞吉，这是《限制因素》节目。投资者日最大的惊喜之一是特斯拉声称他们的下一代平台和电机将不使用稀土金属。我看到特斯拉有三种途径可以实现这一目标。首先，利用Niron磁性材料公司的下一代氮化铁磁铁。其次，特斯拉可以与其拥有世界一流材料团队研发自己的内部磁铁材料。第三，利用内部软件开发一种利用便宜的低效强度磁性材料——铁氧体磁铁的电机。你可以从缩略图中猜到，我的选择是铁氧体磁铁。因此，今天我将向您展示我为什么做出这个决定。在开始之前，特别感谢我的Patreon支持者和YouTube会员。正是这种支持使我有了避免追逐算法和赞助商的自由。如往常一样，支持链接将附在说明中。

First, what's a rare earth metal? Rare earth is a term that's archaic and not accurate. As you can see in this image, some rare earths like Neodymium are actually about as common as copper. So why are they called rare? Two reasons. First, it's because they tend not to form rich, highly concentrated deposits. It makes them more expensive to mine because there's more dirt and rock to sort through to get to the rare earths. Second, their chemical properties are similar to each other, which makes them difficult to chemically isolate and extract. That means additional process steps are required to tease each element from the mind material, which means they're also expensive to refine. The combination of the high mining and refining costs means some rare earths can cost hundreds of dollars per kilogram. However, because rare earths have so many useful and unique properties that make them well suited to high dollar products such as EV motors, wind turbines, and cell phones, companies are willing to bear the high costs.
首先，什么是稀土金属？“稀土”这个术语已经是过时且不准确的。正如你可以在这张图片中看到的那样，像钕这样的一些稀土金属实际上和铜一样常见。那么为什么它们被称为“稀有”？原因有两个。首先，它们往往不会形成富集度高的矿床。这使得它们的开采成本更高，因为需要通过更多的泥土和岩石来筛选出稀土金属。其次，它们的化学性质相似，这使得它们难于化学分离和提取。这意味着需要额外的过程步骤来从矿物材料中提取每个元素，这也意味着它们的精炼成本也很高。高昂的开采和精炼成本的组合意味着一些稀土金属可以达到每公斤数百美元的价格。然而，由于稀土金属具有许多有用和独特的特性，使它们非常适合于高端产品，如电动汽车电机、风力涡轮机和手机，公司愿意承担高昂的成本。

With regards to the earth part of rare earths, earth is an archaic term for materials that couldn't be altered by the heat sources available thousands of years ago, but rather could be altered through other means, such as acid. And because rare earth elements are usually bound up as oxides that dissolve in acid, they were called earths. So why is it a big deal that Tesla's removing rare earths from their next generation motor? Several reasons. First, as I said a moment ago, they're expensive. The second reason is scalability, that a man for rare earths will double in the next decade. That's only a 6.9% growth rate, but it's difficult to open and or expand mining operations to extract and refine rare earths. If Tesla wants to continue growing at 50% per year, it'll make their life a lot easier if they can find an alternative to rare earths, that's easier to scale. The third reason that Tesla's moving away from rare earths is environmental. On the mining end, their mind and large open pits that are disruptive to ecosystems, and on the refining end, they require large volumes of noxious chemicals for processing.
关于稀土元素中的地球部分，地球是一个古老的术语，用来描述那些几千年前不可通过热源改变而需要通过其他方式如酸来改变的材料。由于稀土元素通常是以可溶于酸的氧化物的形式存在，因此它们被称为地球。那么，特斯拉从其下一代发动机中去除稀土元素为什么如此重要？原因有几个。首先，如我刚才所说，它们很昂贵。第二个原因是可扩展性，稀土元素的需求量在未来十年将翻一番。这只是一个6.9％的增长率，但是开采和提炼稀土元素的操作难以扩大。如果特斯拉想要继续以每年50％的增长率增长，那么如果他们能找到一种更易扩展的稀土元素替代品，将会使他们的生活更加轻松。第三个原因是环境问题。在采矿方面，开采稀土元素会造成对生态系统的破坏，可怕的炼制过程会使用大量的有害化学物质。

So for rare earths have so many drawbacks, why does Tesla use them in their motors in the first place? Rare earths like neodymium, which is the primary rare earth in EV motors, have high magnetic strength and high coercivity. High coercivity means that neodymium can be exposed to strong magnetic fields and still maintain its own magnetic field. That is, it's difficult to demagnetize. One measure of magnetic strength is mega-cost or stents, or MGE units, but it also indirectly measures coercivity because a magnet with a higher MGE value will generally have a higher coercivity as well. However, that varies between magnet times. We'll come back to that later. As a side note, my area of expertise is generally batteries rather than magnets and motors, so if I'm getting anything fundamentally incorrect here, let me know in the comments below.
那么稀土最大的缺点是什么呢？为什么特斯拉会在他们的电机里使用稀土呢？像钕这样的稀土元素是电动汽车电机的主要稀土元素，它们具有高磁强度和高矫顽力。高矫顽力意味着钕可以承受强磁场而仍保持它自己的磁场。换句话说，它很难被消磁。衡量磁场强度的一个指标是兆高斯或斯德，或者是MGE单位，但它也间接地衡量了矫顽力，因为磁铁的MGE值越高，它的矫顽力也就越高。然而，这在不同的磁铁之间会有所不同。我们将在后面再来讨论这个问题。顺便提一下，我的专业领域通常是电池而不是磁铁和马达，所以如果我在这里有任何根本性的错误，请在下面的评论中告诉我。

Neodymium or NDFEB magnets are typically around 35-40 MGE, which puts them towards the top of the performance range for magnets, but they're also cheaper per unit of MGE than most of the other magnet options. So for the price, neodymium magnets are powerful and stable, which makes them the best choice for high efficiency, high power motors at a reasonable price.
钕铁硼或NDFEB磁铁通常在35-40 MGE左右，使它们位于磁铁性能范围的顶部，但每单位MGE的价格比大多数其他磁铁选择更便宜。因此，以价格为基础，钕磁铁既强大又稳定，这使它们成为高效率、高功率电机以合理价格的最佳选择。

However, as you can see, there is one other potential option here when it comes to cost per performance, which is ferrite magnets. But with an MGE of around only four, ferrite's lack of magnetic strength and stability means it's difficult to make an EV motor with it, the high efficiency and high power.
然而，正如您所看到的，在性价比方面还有另一种可能的选择，那就是铁氧体磁铁。但是，由于铁氧体磁铁的磁力和稳定性较差，MGE仅约为4，因此很难使用它制造高效率和高功率的电动汽车电机。

What all this means is that if Tesla wants to move away from rare earth magnets like neodymium, they have two options. First, find a new, high MGE low-cost material that's a drop-in replacement for rare earths. Second, there's no first principles reason why ferrite can't be used for an EV motor. So Tesla could invest the engineering resources to make that happen. They could do some combination of these two, but I won't get into that today because there's so many possibilities and it wouldn't provide much additional insight.
这句话的意思是，如果特斯拉想要摆脱像钕这样的稀土永磁体，他们有两个选择。第一，找到一种新的，高MGE低成本的材料，可以完全替代稀土元素。第二，从根本上说，使用铁氧体在电动汽车马达上也可以实现。特斯拉可以投入工程资源来让这一切成为现实。他们可以采用这两种方法的组合，但是由于可能性非常多，而这并不会提供太多额外的见解，因此本文并没有深入探讨此问题。

With that background out of the way, let's get into the technical and practical details of each of those options. First, there's been a lot of chatter about a company called Niron. Niron claims to be able to make a magnet out of iron nitride, which is just iron and nitrogen that's better in every respect than neodymium magnets. Iron nitride has a long history. It was discovered in 1951, explored as a magnetic material in the 1970s and 1990s, and now Niron intends to bring it to full commercial reality.
在了解这方面的背景之后，让我们进入每种选择的技术和实际细节。首先，有很多人在讨论一家叫做Niron的公司。Niron声称能够用铁氮化物制造出比钕磁铁更好的磁铁。铁氮化物有着悠久的历史。它于1951年被发现，在1970年和1990年代被探索为一种磁性材料，现在Niron打算将其带到完全商业化的现实中。

Let's look at Niron's performance and commercialization plans. First, in early 2022, Niron said that they were going to start sending out small samples of their iron nitride products so that commercial partners could assess their technology. Second, I found articles from both 2021 and 2022 saying that Niron had begun construction of a pilot facility that should have been completed in 2022. I couldn't find confirmation that's happened yet, but rather they still seem to be pooling funds for pilot production. I reached out to Niron to gain clarity here, but didn't receive a response.
让我们看一下Niron的表现和商业化计划。首先，在2022年初，Niron表示他们将开始发送小样本的铁氮化产品，以便商业伙伴可以评估他们的技术。其次，我发现从2021年到2022年，有文章称Niron已经开始建设一个试点工厂，应该在2022年完成。我没有找到确认的消息，但是他们似乎仍在为试点生产筹集资金。我联系了Niron以获得这方面的明确信息，但没有得到回复。

Third, their intent is to offer their first commercial product in late 2024 with an MGE of 10, which is suitable for some motors but not to directly replace rare earths and EV motors. Rather, these magnets are better suited to other applications like speakers and sensors. Following that, they intend to roll out their second commercial product in 2025 with an MGE of 30, which could be a suitable replacement for neodymium and electric motors. More on that in a moment.
第三，他们的意图是在2024年底推出他们的第一个商业产品，其磁能积为10，适用于某些电动机但不适用于直接替代稀土和电动汽车电机。相反，这些磁铁更适合用于其他应用，如扬声器和传感器。随后，他们计划在2025年推出第二个商业产品，其磁能积为30，可以作为镝铁硼和电动汽车电机的适当替代品。稍后进一步讨论这一点。

What all this tells me is that there appears to be a misalignment between Niron's plans and Tesla's plans. Based on the public statements by Tesla, their Mexico factory is expected to be in production next year, and that's likely where vehicles using Tesla's next-generation motor will be produced. If Niron's most current advice is correct, they plan on being in pilot production producing 10 MGE magnets in 2024.
这一切告诉我，Niron的计划和特斯拉的计划似乎存在不协调的情况。根据特斯拉的公开声明，他们的墨西哥工厂预计将在明年投产，很可能是生产使用特斯拉下一代电机的车辆。如果Niron最新的建议是正确的，他们计划在2024年开始进行试制生产，生产10个MGE磁铁。

Let's look at the two misalignments that it creates. First, because those magnets are only 10 MGE, they wouldn't be a suitable drop in replacement for neodymium and would require a completely reworked motor. At that point, if Tesla has to redesign the motor anyways to use weaker magnets, they may as well use ferrite. Yes, Niron does have plans for a 30 MGE magnet that's competitive with automotive grade neodymium in 2025, but that appears to be too little too late. Tesla already has estimates for the factory footprint and cost for their next-generation rare earth-free motor, which means that not only is the motor designed, but likely also the production system for the motor. That is, it's in the final stages of commercialization and has likely been in development for years. Beyond that, Tesla's already removed a lot of the rare earths from their motors, and that's past tense. They did it without any help from Niron. As far as we can tell, no new materials were required, just better engineering with better motor design software.
让我们看看它所带来的两个不对齐。首先，由于这些磁铁只有10 MGE，它们不适合取代钕铁硼并需要完全重构电机。到了这一点，如果特斯拉必须重新设计电机以使用较弱的磁铁，他们可能会使用铁氧体。是的，Niron确实计划在2025年推出一个与汽车级钕铁硼相竞争的30 MGE磁铁，但这似乎为时已晚。特斯拉已经对其下一代无稀土电机的工厂占地面积和成本进行了估算，这意味着电机已经设计好，很可能也已经投入生产。也就是说，它已经进入商业化的最后阶段，很可能已经开发了多年时间。此外，特斯拉已经从他们的电机中删除了大量的稀土，这是过去时态。他们没有得到Niron的任何帮助，也不需要使用新材料，只需要更好的工程技术和更好的电机设计软件。

The second misalignment between Niron and Tesla is that Tesla's a global behemoth that will require an enormous amount of material for even one compact vehicle line producing a million units per year. It's doubtful that Niron's pilot-scale facility will be able to handle that kind of volume.
特斯拉和Niron之间的第二个不协调之处在于，特斯拉是一个全球巨头，即使只生产一条紧凑型汽车生产线，每年也需要大量的材料。 Niron的试点规模设施可能无法处理这种规模的产量。

Some might argue that Tesla could license Niron's technology and manufacture the iron nitride magnets themselves. However, in my view, that argument quickly falls over because there's nothing there to license. Niron's magnets aren't commercially proven, and neither is the manufacturing process to produce those magnets.
有人可能会认为特斯拉可以授权使用 Niron 的技术并自行制造铁氮磁体。然而，在我看来，这种论点很快就被推翻了，因为没有什么可供授权的。 Niron 的磁体尚未商业化证明，制造这些磁体的过程也没有得到证明。

But let's assume Tesla decided to try some type of licensing deal anyways. That would mean solving the manufacturing challenges of bringing iron nitride to market while Niron themselves would be doing the same for the pilot plant. That would be a duplication of effort and a waste of resources. It would make more sense for Tesla to just buy Niron and combine forces.
但让我们假设特斯拉决定尝试某种形式的许可协议。这意味着解决将铁氮化物带到市场上的制造挑战，而Niron本身也将为试点工厂做同样的准备。这将是一种工作重复和资源浪费。更明智的做法是特斯拉只需购买Niron，并合并双方的力量。

Even then, it would still be a stretch to manufacture enough material from that pilot plant by 2024 for hundreds of thousands of vehicles. Beyond that, licensing also poses capture risks. Tesla wants to be the master of their own destiny.
即使如此，到2024年从那个试点工厂制造出足够材料来供应数十万辆汽车仍然是一项挑战。此外，许可证也存在被控制的风险。特斯拉希望成为自己命运的主宰。

If Tesla was a licensee of Niron, Niron could wag the dog or make Tesla's life difficult. This is part of the reason why Tesla gave mobile-y the boot years ago and started developing their own in-house self-driving software, why they prefer to use highly available materials and why they're increasingly vertically integrated.
如果特斯拉是 Niron 的许可证持有人，那么 Niron 可能会左右特斯拉的命运或者让特斯拉的生活变得困难。这也是特斯拉多年前将 Mobileye 弃之不顾，开始开发自己的自动驾驶软件，以及为什么他们更喜欢使用高可用性的材料并且越来越向垂直一体化方向发展的部分原因。

Anything mission-critical can't be left to chance. Even if the relationship between Niron and Tesla was excellent, Niron would still represent a single point of failure that's outside of Tesla's full control. With that in mind, I view it as unlikely that Tesla would trust the ramp of arguably their most important vehicle ever to a product that's never been manufactured at scale.
任何关键任务都不能交给机会。即使Niron和特斯拉之间的关系非常好，Niron仍然代表着特斯拉无法完全控制的单一故障点。因此，我认为特斯拉很难相信这种从未大规模生产过的产品来推出他们最重要的汽车。

But there's one more nail in the coffin for collaboration between Niron and Tesla. Earlier, I said that MGE measures magnetic strength directly and is generally a good indicator of coercivity, which is the ability to resist demagnetization. Fire nitride is the exception to that rule.
但是对于Niron和特斯拉之间的合作关系来说，还有一个进一步的挫折。之前，我说过MGE可以直接测量磁强度，通常是抗磁化能力的良好指标。但是火氮化物却是一个例外。

As per the CEO of Niron, their 2025 product will have the coercivity of ferrite. That comments a big deal because ferrite has relatively low coercivity. Low coercivity is one of the main reasons why ferrite isn't used in EV motors. Ferrites tend to demagnetize which causes the motor to lose power.
据Niron的首席执行官表示，他们在2025年的产品将拥有铁氧体的矫顽力。这是一件大事，因为铁氧体的矫顽力相对较低。低矫顽力是铁氧体没有被用于电动汽车马达的主要原因之一。铁氧体容易去磁，这会导致马达失去动力。

As we'll see later in the video, that's a solvable problem, but it means that Niron's magnets are definitely not a direct replacement for neodymium and would require a lot of engineering effort to adapt to EV motors.
正如我们稍后在视频中所看到的那样，这是一个可以解决的问题，但这意味着Niron的磁铁绝对不是永磁铁的直接替代品，并且需要大量的工程努力来适应电动汽车马达。

So as an interim summary, I think what Niron's doing is impressive and useful for the world. And more broadly, I'm excited to see the commercialization of the first new class of magnet material in decades. However, just because a technology is exciting doesn't mean that it can and will immediately be used for everything. Niron still has to prove that their iron nitride technology is a good choice for EV motors, improve its performance characteristics, and improve that it can be scaled. And in my view, that could take years.
因此，作为一个暂时的总结，我认为Niron所做的是令人钦佩的，也对世界有用。更广泛地说，我很兴奋地看到了几十年来第一种新型磁体材料的商业化。然而，仅仅因为一种技术令人兴奋，并不意味着它可以立即用于一切。Niron仍然需要证明他们的氮化铁技术是电动汽车电机的一个好选择，并改善其性能特征和可扩展性。在我看来，这可能需要数年时间。

Let's look at the second option for Tesla, which is leveraging their in-house materials team to produce a magnet material of their own design, whether that be iron nitride or something else. Tesla's materials team is actually a shared team with SpaceX and it's one of the best materials teams in the world.
让我们来看看特斯拉的第二个选项，那就是利用他们内部的材料团队来生产他们自己设计的磁铁材料，无论是氮化铁还是其他材料。特斯拉的材料团队实际上是与SpaceX共享的团队，是全世界最优秀的材料团队之一。

It consistently pull rabbits out of hats from the Pika ablite of material used on the dragon capsule to the stainless steel used on starship and cybertruck to the special alloy used in their gigapresses to make gigacastings. In my view, it's certainly possible that Tesla could make their own magnet material, but it has a similar likelihood to Tesla using Niron magnets, which is low.
特斯拉公司在材料方面一直具有惊人的实力，无论是在龙飞船上使用的Pika材料、在星际飞船和赛博卡车上使用的不锈钢、还是在巨型压铸机上使用的特殊合金制造巨型铸件，都能展现出他们的独特技术。在我看来，特斯拉公司也有可能自己制造磁铁材料，但这种可能性与他们使用Niron磁铁的可能性相当低。

Let's look at the arguments for and against Tesla developing their own magnet material. As Elon said at Battery Day, the materials team is working on a number of materials that they're not ready to share. Although developing magnetic materials is one of the most difficult challenges Tesla's materials team could undertake, it's been clear for over a decade that rare earths would eventually become a bottleneck.
让我们来看一下支持和反对特斯拉开发自己磁性材料的观点。正如埃隆在电池日所说，材料团队正在研究许多他们还不愿透露的材料。虽然开发磁性材料是特斯拉材料团队可能要面对的最困难的挑战之一，但已经有十多年的时间明显地表明，稀土材料最终会成为瓶颈。

That is, it's a problem they've had time to work on, and there's no reason for Tesla to in-source a material, part or software package when they can do it in-house, better and cheaper, and be the master of their own destiny. That's the point of having one of the best materials teams in the world if you don't use it. The only good reason would be that you have a better idea, but we'll come back to that in a moment.
换言之，这是他们有时间解决的问题，特斯拉没有理由内部生产材料、零部件或软件包，因为他们可以在内部更好、更便宜地完成，并成为自己命运的主人。这就是拥有全球最好材料团队的意义所在，如果你不使用它的话。唯一的好理由是你有更好的想法，但我们稍后会回到这个问题上来。

What about arguments against?
反对的论据呢？

The first argument against Tesla developing their own iron nitride material would be that Niron has been working on iron nitride magnets for over a decade, and they have patents which would protect their technology.
反对特斯拉开发自己的氮化铁材料的第一个论点是，Niron已经研究氮化铁磁体超过十年，他们有专利来保护他们的技术。

My view is that too many people assume that because a company has a patent on something, it's game over for everyone else. And what I've seen, there are generally ways to sidestep patents if you have a clever engineering team.
我的观点是，太多人认为只要一家公司拥有某个专利，其他所有人就会被淘汰。但是，据我所见，如果你拥有一支聪明的工程团队，通常有方法可以规避专利。

So a better way to look at it isn't that Niron has patents. It's that so far I haven't seen any patent applications from Tesla for high-strength magnetic materials or the production of them.
因此，更好的看法不是Niron拥有专利，而是到目前为止，我还没有看到特斯拉对高强度磁性材料或其生产提交任何专利申请。

Then again, sometimes Tesla patent applications don't show up until after they've unveiled the product. So we have a potential blind spot.
然而，有时特斯拉的专利申请直到他们推出产品后才出现。因此，我们可能存在潜在的盲点。

With all that in mind, why do I think it's unlikely that Tesla is developing their own magnetic materials like iron nitride for their next generation rare earth-free motor? It's because from my perspective, the cost-benefit ratio is questionable. It would take a lot of engineering resources and capital to develop and scale their own material. And it doesn't appear to be necessary. So it's not that I think Tesla couldn't develop a magnetic material. It's that I don't think it would be the best use of resources because I believe there's a better option.
考虑到以上所有因素，我为什么认为特斯拉在开发下一代无稀土电机时不太可能开发自己的磁性材料，例如铁氮化物呢？因为我认为成本效益比值具有疑问性。开发和扩大规模自己的材料需要耗费大量工程资源和资本，而这似乎并不是必需的，因此我认为，这并不是因为特斯拉不能开发磁性材料，而是因为我认为这不是最好的资源利用方式，因为我相信有更好的选择。

With that, let's get into fair-ite motors. As I said earlier, based on cost per performance, there are currently only two viable options for EV motors, neodymium and fair-ite.
带着这个前提，让我们来了解一下费亚瑞特电机。正如我之前所说的，基于性能成本，目前只有两种可行的选项用于电动车电机，钕铁硼和费亚瑞特。

Fair-ite magnets are made of ceramic iron oxides and so they're cheap at about one-tenth the cost of neodymium per unit of weight. But they're also low strength at about one-tenth the MGE of EV motor-grade neodymium.
Fair-ite磁铁由陶瓷氧化铁制成，因此它们的成本便宜，每个单位重量大约是钕铁硼的十分之一。但是，它们的强度也很低，大约是EV电机级别的钕铁硼磁铁的十分之一。

So it comes out in the wash, right? Not quite because MGE isn't calculated by weight. It's calculated by volume. Fair-ite has a density of about 5 grams per cubic centimeter, whereas neodymium has a density of about 7.5 grams per cubic centimeter. That means fair-ite costs about 33% less per unit of performance. That is, if you're looking to drive down cost, fair-ite is the way to go.
这么说来就简单明了了吗？其实不是的，因为MGE的计算不是按重量来计算的，而是按体积计算的。Fair-ite的密度约为每立方厘米5克，而钕的密度约为每立方厘米7.5克。这意味着，以性能单位计算，Fair-ite的成本约低33%。也就是说，如果您想降低成本，选择Fair-ite是最好的方式。

The problem is, as I said earlier, fair-ite just doesn't have the magnetic strength and stability to create a motor that's as efficient and powerful as a neodymium motor. Let's take a closer look. With the neodymium magnets in a Tesla motor, there are 12 magnet slots oriented around the rotor and a relatively simple design to shape the magnetic fields.
问题在于，正如我之前所说的那样，铁灰矿石缺乏足够的磁性强度和稳定性，无法创造出与钕铁硼马达一样高效强大的马达。让我们更仔细地看一下。在特斯拉马达的钕铁硼磁铁中，转子周围有12个磁铁槽，并且相对简单的设计可以塑造磁场。

With fair-ite, you'd have to stuff in 10 times the volume of magnets in a much more complex arrangement to get the same effect. Furthermore, because fair-ite has lower coercivity than neodymium, it's easily demagnetized when exposed to competing magnetic fields. This makes fair-ite motors quite the engineering puzzle because they require a high packing density of magnets in a small area, but arranged in such a way that they don't get demagnetized.
使用费尔石制造的磁铁，你需要将体积增加十倍，且更复杂地排列才能获得与使用钕铁硼磁铁相同的效果。此外，由于费尔石的磁化强度较低，当遇到竞争性磁场时容易磁化消失。这使得费尔石电机成为一项极具挑战性的工程难题，因为它们需要在一个小区域内高密度地排列磁铁，同时又不会磁化消失。

What further complicates the challenge is that EV motors have high demands in terms of power, efficiency, and weight. So although there are already fair-ite motors on the market, making one that meets the needs of the automotive industry is a jigsaw puzzle that no one solved yet, despite a lot of attempts.
更加复杂的挑战是，电动汽车的电机在功率、效率和重量方面要求非常高。虽然市场上已经有了一些不错的电机，但要制造符合汽车行业需求的电机却像是一副未经解谜的拼图，尽管已经做出了很多尝试，但没有人成功解决。

Let's look at the research on fair-ite motors. Generally, if I want to learn about a topic, I look for a review paper. In this instance, I googled fair-ite motors review paper, and the top hit was right on the money.
让我们来了解一下公平石英电动机的研究。通常，如果我想学习一个主题，我会寻找一篇综述文章。在这个情况下，我在谷歌上搜索了公平石英电动机的综述文章，而第一个结果正是我想要的。

It was titled, Low Cost, High Performance, Fair-ite Permanent Magnet Machines, and EV Applications, a comprehensive review by Patrick Chi-Kwang-Luk at Al.
这篇文章的标题是“低成本、高性能、公平永磁机和电动汽车应用”，作者是Al公司的Patrick Chi-Kwang-Luk，是一篇全面综述性的评论文章。

One of the key takeaways of the paper was that fair-ite motors are approaching the torque density of a 2004 Prius motor, a comparison to a Model 3 motor would have been better, but the Prius motor is still automotive grade.
这篇论文的一个关键结论是：无刷电机与2004年式普锐斯电机的扭矩密度相当，虽然与Model 3电机的比较更理想一些，但普锐斯电机仍达到汽车级别的标准。

So an automotive grade fair-ite motor has been possible since about 2013, which was a decade ago. It's just that neodymium motors have continued to improve since the 2004 Prius. That is, there's no physics that say a high-performance fair-ite motor isn't possible. It's just about getting the right engineers in the room with the right modeling software to make it happen.
因此，自2013年以来，汽车级别的珏石电机就已经出现了，也就是10年前。只是自2004年Prius以来，钕铁硼电机不断改进。也就是说，没有物理学说高性能珏石电机不可能。只需要将正确的工程师与正确的建模软件放在一起，就可以实现它。

And as we know from investor day, Tesla built their own in-house modeling software, and this is what they said about it. Quote, our custom software lets us simulate the rotating magnetic field, and getting that simulation exactly right is central to the cost, weight, size, and even the sound of the drive unit.
正如我们所知道的，特斯拉在投资者日上展示了他们自己的内部建模软件，并且这就是他们对此的说法：“我们的定制软件使我们可以模拟旋转磁场，确保模拟的准确性对于驱动单元的成本、重量、大小甚至声音都至关重要。”

You can buy software that'll do this, but our tools are faster and they're more accurate, and that allows us to quickly iterate through millions of possible drive unit designs to find the best one. End quote.
您可以购买可以做到这一点的软件，但是我们的工具更快速和更准确，这使我们能够快速迭代数百万可能的驱动单元设计，以找到最佳的一个。结束引述。

In other words, if researchers were able to make a good fair-ite motor 10 years ago, what can Tesla do now with some of the best engineers in the world, the best software, and deep pockets? In my view, the answer is a fair-ite motor that's perfect for a compact Tesla.
换句话说，如果研究人员在10年前能够制造出一款优秀的永磁电机，那么有了世界上最好的工程师、最好的软件和雄厚的资金，特斯拉现在能够做到什么呢？在我看来，答案就是一款非常适合紧凑型特斯拉的优秀永磁电机。

Notice that I'm not saying that it'll be some type of high-performance motor that will crush or dominate a neodymium motor in efficiency and power. That's because I don't think that would be Tesla's design goal, because that's not what a compact Tesla would need.
请注意，我并不是在说它会是某种高性能电机，在效率和功率上碾压或主宰钕磁电机。这是因为我认为这不会是特斯拉的设计目标，因为这不是一个紧凑的特斯拉需要的。

The top priorities for a high-volume budget vehicle will likely be cost, scalability, efficiency, and power output. Roughly in that order, let's take a look at each.
对于一个大量销售的预算车辆，首要考虑因素可能是成本、可扩展性、效率和动力输出。大致上按照这个顺序，我们来依次看一下每个因素。

As I said earlier, a fair-ite motor will have magnets that cost about 33% less per unit of performance. Since the compact vehicle needing a smaller motor, I expect this is one of the major ways that Tesla was able to bring the cost of the next generation drive unit below $1,000.
正如我之前所说，一台公平磁电机的永磁体每单位性能的成本会比较低，降低了大约33%。由于紧凑型车辆只需要较小的电机，我认为这是特斯拉能够将下一代驱动单元的成本降至1,000美元以下的主要途径之一。

Next, scalability. Fair-ite magnets are made of iron and oxygen. That means the material supply for fair-ite magnets is quasi-infinite. That would also be true of iron nitride magnets, but there's currently no one making those magnets at scale, and they'll take time to scale.
接下来谈谈可扩展性。Fair-ite磁铁由铁和氧制成。这意味着Fair-ite磁铁的物料供应近乎无限。铁氮化物磁铁也同样如此，但目前没有任何厂商在大规模生产这种磁铁，而且还需要时间来扩大规模。

Furthermore, besides the raw materials, Tesla can dip into what's already a massive fair-ite magnet market with dozens of suppliers. So in terms of the scalability of fair-ite, Tesla can expect stable prices, no issues with a single point of failure, and minimal issues with expanding supply as their production grows.
此外，除了原材料外，特斯拉还可以利用已经存在的庞大的磁铁市场，该市场拥有数十个供应商。因此，就稀土的可扩展性而言，特斯拉可以期望稳定的价格，没有单一故障点的问题，并且随着其生产规模的扩大，扩大供应的问题也将最小化。

With regards to efficiency, a Patreon supporter sent me a recent white paper on a fair-ite motor that achieved 93% efficiency. This isn't necessarily the best fair-ite motor I've seen, but it provided good visuals that hit the key specs.
关于效率，一位Patreon支持者向我发送了一篇最近的白皮书，介绍了一种实现了93%效率的公正磁电机。虽然这不一定是我见过的最好的公正磁电机，但它提供了很好的视觉效果，并符合关键规格。

How does 93% compare to a Tesla motor? It's the same efficiency as the induction motors and the older versions of the Model S. However, it's short of the reported 97% motor efficiency that was achieved with the Model 3 motor in 2019.
93%的效率如何与特斯拉电机相比？它的效率与感应电机和旧版本的Model S相同。然而，它的效率低于据报道在2019年实现的Model 3电机的97%。

If we also factor in that Tesla's newest motors are using hairpin technology, which should increase efficiency by 1%, the current production motors are probably achieving around 98% efficiency. That is, the lowest efficiency we could possibly expect for a Tesla fair-ite motor would be around 93%, which served the Model S well, but it likely wouldn't be as high as the 98% in newer Teslas.
如果我们将特斯拉最新的电机使用的 "细长铁芯"（hairpin technology）计算在内，这可以提高效率约1％，那么目前的生产电机的效率可能达到了98％左右。也就是说，即使对于一台特斯拉 "公平排名" 电机来说，我们也不能期望效率低于93％，这种效率已经为Model S服务了很长时间，但它可能不如新款特斯拉的98％高。

But those newer Teslas are luxury EVs which can afford to use more expensive neodymium magnets, for a budget compact vehicle and efficiency rating in the mid 90% range may be acceptable because smaller cheaper vehicles gain efficiency improvements in so many other areas.
然而，这些新型的特斯拉豪华电动车可以承受更昂贵的钕磁铁，而对于预算紧张的紧凑型车型来说，中等90%的效率评级可能是可接受的，因为更小更便宜的车辆在其他许多领域都可以获得效率提升。

For example, just switching from 19-inch rims to 15-inch rims can increase efficiency by 10%, and that doesn't include the lower rolling resistance of narrower tires, less wind resistance from a smaller vehicle cross-section and lower weight. So although motor efficiency is important, it's one of many factors.
例如，仅仅将轮毂从19英寸换成15英寸就可以提高效率达到10％，这还不包括更窄的轮胎较低的滚动阻力、更小的车身横截面较小的风阻以及更轻的重量。因此，尽管发动机效率很重要，但它只是许多因素之一。

Some might point out that Tesla's slide says, higher efficiency drive units using zero rare earths. The question is, higher efficiency than what? I'd be surprised if Tesla can best the 98% efficiency of a rare earth-based motor with a rare earth-free motor, regardless of whether it's using fair-ite magnets or neuron magnets.
有人可能会指出特斯拉的演示中提到了使用零稀土的高效驱动单元。但问题是，比起什么来说是更高效呢？即使使用鉴石或神经元磁铁，我还是深信特斯拉很难在没有稀土的马达上取得比基于稀土的马达的98%更高的效率。

If they are able to hit 98% or greater efficiency with a rare earth-free motor that may mean my theory about fair-ite is wrong, and Tesla has their hands on a new material. I'd love to be wrong here and the use of a new material would definitely be more exciting than fair-ite. But for me, it would be jumping to conclusions off of what may be in precise squirting.
如果他们能够使用一种无稀土电机，实现98%或更高的效率，那么这可能意味着我对fair-ite的理论是错误的，而特斯拉已经掌握了一种新材料。我希望我是错误的，使用一种新材料肯定比使用fair-ite更令人兴奋。但对我来说，这可能是基于可能不够精确的推断。

Finally, power. A compact vehicle doesn't need to do zero to 60 in under six seconds like Tesla's other vehicles, which is another reason why the next generation motor will be so cheap. It'll be small in the first place because it'll be for a compact vehicle, and again, smaller still because it won't need to be a hot rod.
最后，电力。紧凑型车辆并不需要像特斯拉的其他车辆那样零到六十英里/小时加速在六秒以下，这也是下一代电动机价格便宜的另一个原因。首先它会很小，因为它将是用于紧凑型车辆，而且，由于它不需要成为“热棒”，所以它会更小。

The same paper that described a 93% efficient fair-ite motor showed that it offered 90% of the torque of a neodymium-based motor. That is, if Tesla designed a fair-ite motor, it would have plenty of torque for the needs of a compact vehicle.
同一份论文中，描述了一种93%的效率磁铁马达，并表示它提供了钕铁硼磁铁马达90%的扭矩。也就是说，如果特斯拉设计一种磁铁马达，这种fair-ite马达的扭矩足够满足紧凑型车辆的需要。

It's likely that the compact vehicle will have a motor that's around half the power of a Model 3 motor, which has roughly 280 horsepower and 310 foot-pounds of torque. So Tesla could use a motor that's both smaller and less power dense.
紧凑型车很可能会采用功率约为Model 3电机的一半的电机，Model 3电机约有280马力和310英尺的扭矩。因此，特斯拉可以使用更小、更低功率密度的电机。

This is much the same way that the Performance Model 3 has less than half the power of a Plaid Model S using motors that are less power dense. If they did want to make a performance version of the compact Tesla, they could just make an all-wheel drive version with double the power.
这与性能版 Model 3 在使用功率较低的电机的情况下，与 Plaid Model S 相比的动力不足一半类似。如果他们想制造一款紧凑型特斯拉的性能版本，他们可以只需要制造一款具有双倍功率的全轮驱动版本。

Some people might suggest Tesla's carbon-overwrapped rotor technology, but I expect that'll only be used on high-end vehicles in the Tesla semi. That's because the process to make the motor involves the extra process step of wrapping the steel rotor of the motor with carbon fiber under high tension, which adds time, cost, and complexity to the manufacturing process.
一些人可能会建议使用特斯拉的碳纤维重叠转子技术，但我预计这只会在特斯拉半挂车的高端车辆上使用。这是因为制造电动机需要额外的步骤，即在高张力下用碳纤维包裹电动机的钢转子，这增加了制造过程的时间、成本和复杂性。

Overall, the only potential showstopper I see with ferrite motors is demagnetization. With that said, the severity of demagnetization is dependent on motor design. The ferrite motor paper that showed 93% efficiency and 90% of the torque of a neodymium motor used what's called a spoke-type ferrite motor, which is a design that's prone to demagnetization.
总的来说，我所看到的陶瓷磁铁电机可能会遇到的唯一潜在问题是磁化消失。然而，需要指出的是，磁化消失的严重程度取决于电机的设计。那篇展示了93%效率和镝铁硼电机的90%扭矩的陶瓷磁铁电机论文使用的是所谓的辐条-类型陶瓷磁铁电机，这种设计容易磁化消失。

Despite that, the researchers showed that their design suffered negligible demagnetization at the rated current, and only saw a decrease of induced voltage by 0.5% when the inverter current was exceeded. I would caution that they didn't advise how long that demagnetization took to occur, or how it would evolve over time. But again, bear in mind that it's a design issue rather than a physics issue.
然而，研究人员表明他们的设计在额定电流下几乎不会磁化，只有当逆变器电流超过时，感应电压才会降低0.5%。我想提醒大家的是，他们并没有说明这种磁化需要多长时间才会发生，或者它会如何随着时间的推移而发展。但再次强调，这是一个设计问题而不是物理问题。

In summary, as much as NIRON's iron nitride magnets are exciting, they just don't appear to be ready for prime time yet to compete with neodymium in electric motors. Most both in terms of their magnetic strength, which isn't expected to be on par with neodymium until 2025, and scaling. So far, the plans for their pilot production plant are unclear.
总之，尽管NIRON的氮化铁磁铁很令人兴奋，但它们似乎还没有准备好与钕铁硼竞争电动机市场。从磁力强度和规模两方面看，它们的表现都不如钕铁硼。预计直到2025年才能达到与钕铁硼相当的磁力强度。目前，他们试点生产工厂的计划还不清楚。

But if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say they're intending to commission a pilot plant in 2024. Even then, that'll take time to scale. Pilot production means low volume, and they'd still need to build a full-sized factory to meet the demands of a company like Tesla. Meanwhile, Tesla appears to have the skills in-house to develop their own iron nitride or other magnetic materials, but the cost benefit of developing them probably isn't worth it.
但是如果我要猜测的话，我会说他们打算在2024年委托建造一个试点工厂。即使如此，还需要时间来扩大规模。试点生产意味着生产规模较小，他们仍然需要建造一个大型工厂来满足像特斯拉这样的公司的需求。与此同时，特斯拉似乎具备内部开发自己的铁氮化物或其他磁性材料的技能，但开发它们的成本效益可能并不值得。

Not only would it involve Tesla developing a process to make that material, but also develop the supply chain and factories to scale it, whether that's in-house or contracted. That's as compared to the alternative, ferrite, which has an existing supply chain that's extensive. Tesla has the know-how in-house to develop a ferrite motor. That ferrite motor likely won't be as efficient or as powerful as a neodymium motor, but it would be within a few percent.
这不仅需要特斯拉开发制备该材料的工艺，还需要开发供应链和工厂来扩大规模，无论是内部生产还是外部承包。相比之下，现有供应链广泛的铁氧体是一种可选方案。特斯拉内部有开发铁氧体电机的专业技能。虽然铁氧体电机可能不会像钕铁硼电机一样高效和强大，但它的效率只会少数百分点。

That would likely be acceptable for Tesla because a compact budget vehicle would be inherently efficient and have lower power requirements. Instead, the priority will likely be cost and scalability. The point of a compact budget vehicle will be to democratize EVs, and that means making it as cheap as possible, and at production volumes that will likely be higher than any other vehicle in history.
这对特斯拉来说可能是可以接受的，因为紧凑型预算车辆本质上是高效的，并且具有较低的能源需求。相反，重点很可能是成本和可扩展性。紧凑型预算车辆的目的是要让电动汽车通俗化，这意味着使它尽可能便宜，并且可能会制造出比历史上任何其他汽车都更高的生产量。

Ferrite magnets can deliver on both, because they cost 33% less per unit of performance than neodymium and are made of iron oxide, which is abundant and easily scalable. Some might argue that Tesla would simply never use a lower performance motor in exchange for cost and scalability. However, we've already seen Tesla enthusiastically take that trade in the past with LFP battery cells.
铁氧体磁铁可以同时满足成本和性能要求，因为其单位性能成本比钕铁硼磁铁低33%，并且它由丰富且易于扩展的铁氧化物制成。有人可能会认为，特斯拉绝不会为了成本和可扩展性而使用性能更低的电机。然而，我们已经看到特斯拉过去热情地接受了这样的交易，并采用了LFP电池单元。

Around half of Tesla's vehicle production now uses iron-based LFP battery cells that have lower vehicle level efficiency and power than nickel-based battery cells. Why? First, scalability and cost. Iron-based LFP has fewer resource constraints than nickel-based cells, and due to that tends to be cheaper over time. Second, Tesla's standard range vehicles don't need to maximize performance and range. They just need enough performance and range to create an appealing product for the price point.
如今，特斯拉约一半的车辆产量使用基于铁的LFP电池，其车辆级能效和功率低于基于镍的电池。为什么呢？首先，可扩展性和成本。基于铁的LFP相较于基于镍的电池所需资源更少，因此随着时间推移，价格相对更便宜。其次，特斯拉的标准车型不需要追求最大的性能和续航里程，它们只需要足够的性能和续航里程，以创造一个具有吸引力的产品价格点。

I see the same dynamic with neodymium-rare Earth versus ferrite-based motors. With great engineering throughout the vehicle and powertrain, Tesla can use cheap, easily scalable, lower performance materials to make the best-selling vehicles in the world.
我看到了永磁稀土与铁氧体电机之间相同的动态。通过精湛的整车及动力传动工程，特斯拉可以使用廉价、易于扩展、性能较低的材料制造全球畅销的车型。

As usual, this is my opinion. Let me know what you think in the comments below. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting me on Patreon with the link at the end of the video or as a YouTube member. You can find the details in the description. A special thanks to my YouTube members and all the patrons listed in the credits. I appreciate all your support and thanks for tuning in.
像往常一样，这是我的意见。请在下面的评论中，让我知道你们的想法。如果你们喜欢这个视频，请考虑通过视频末尾的链接或成为一个YouTube会员来支持我。你们可以在描述中找到详细信息。特别感谢我的YouTube会员和所有在核心名单中的资助者。感谢你们的支持和收看。