Thanks to @KeefWivanef1 on Twitter and Flickr I was able to obtain a good picture of the Tesla Link.
I copied the webs inside the link and I got this model ready. This is similar but not identical to the Tesla Link.
Everything from the picture is there i.e. webs and their relative positions with radiuses (very important). The volume of the model is V=9.818 in3 (that is only a model scaled down).
An alternative link has almost the same volume of material V=9.767 in3, so both models can be compared apples to apples. All other things are the same; material, loads, constraints and the volume of material.
The results for Tesla Link were;
Following parameters were computed:
Min. Factor of Safety = 1.685; displacement max. = .0045″ ; stress max. = 4747 psi.
Let’s see the same for Alternative Link;
Min. Factor of Safety = 2.522; displacement max. = .0034″ ; stress max = 3174 psi
From the picture where the scales of Safety Factor are the same, it is obvious that Tesla Link is less efficient in carrying the load. Both designs use the same amount of material and are readily made by extrusion. The more yellow the worse it is. The highest stresses are at the points the there is either change cross-section or sharp corner (at all sharp corners radiuses are applied to dissipate stresses)
In the Alternative Link, there is only 66% sensitivity to load than in the Tesla Link.
Initially, I thought that my first pass at this link was deficient by not incorporating all those details revealed in the picture. After bringing them to the model the first conclusion still holds water.