Author Topic: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown  (Read 64115 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline T4P

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3697
  • Country: sg
    • T4P
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #125 on: February 15, 2013, 07:31:45 am »
Or they could go with LiFePO4 which would add even less weight, as in just one passenger being as skinny as Tiffany Yep (rather than being "average American" weight) would more than offset the difference!
I definitely think they wanted more energy density.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 38051
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #126 on: February 15, 2013, 09:46:31 am »
The investigation is now looking a dendrites being the problem:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/12/uk-boeing-dreamliner-battery-dendrites-idUSLNE91B00V20130212

Dave.
 

Offline EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 38051
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #127 on: February 15, 2013, 09:47:47 am »
Airbus gets the heebie-jeebies and ditches Lithium Ion batteries:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/feb/15/airbus-lithium-ion-batteries-dreamliner

Dave.
 

Offline G7PSK

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3863
  • Country: gb
  • It is hot until proved not.
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #128 on: February 15, 2013, 11:03:02 am »
I was wondering if rapid pressure changes that the vents could not cope with could cause the electrodes to pinch through the plate separators. Now with the information that dendrites could be involved does reduced pressure encourage or expedite dendritic growth.
 

Online SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16349
  • Country: za
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #129 on: February 15, 2013, 05:41:01 pm »
Lead free solder rears it's bad side again.
 

Offline Mr Smiley

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 324
  • Country: gb
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #130 on: February 15, 2013, 06:14:33 pm »
Starts off with an interesting graph showing Specific power (W/kg) against Specific  Energy (Wh/kg) for different battery types, which I hadn't seen before.

The paper issue that this article comes from is almost totally about the li-Ion battery issue, and how other have tried it, given up on it, or had incidents.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_02_04_2013_p20-543232.xml

Seems that Airbus are changing (back) to NiCd for the A350 (as used on the A380).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21477126


Credit for the above from a post from the picklist, so i take no credit, just passing on the info

Mr Smiley  :)
There is enough on this planet to sustain mans needs. There will never be enough on this planet to sustain mans greed.
 

Offline Neilm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1551
  • Country: gb
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #131 on: February 15, 2013, 10:55:29 pm »
Lead free solder rears it's bad side again.

The aviation industry requires high reliability. Therefore they don't allow lead free solder to be used.

Neil
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. - Albert Einstein
Tesla referral code https://ts.la/neil53539
 

Offline JoeyP

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 321
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #132 on: February 15, 2013, 11:28:26 pm »
Airbus gets the heebie-jeebies and ditches Lithium Ion batteries

Airbus smells "marketing opportunity". Even if Boeing could completely explain the failures, and have an absolutely reliable solution, this pretty much forces them to change to a different battery chemistry. Otherwise Airbus can use it as a differentiator for their competing model until the end of time.
 

Offline HackedFridgeMagnet

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2031
  • Country: au
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #133 on: February 16, 2013, 12:03:39 am »
Airbus gets the heebie-jeebies and ditches Lithium Ion batteries

Airbus smells "marketing opportunity".

My first thoughts too.
If I was in Airbus marketing I think I would be stirring the FUD pot as well.
 

Offline mzzj

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1268
  • Country: fi
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #134 on: February 16, 2013, 11:53:33 pm »
Like I said earlier, Boeing Aerospace would not let Li Ion on the space shuttle, they were not allowed for safety reasons.  I have been in their lab many times, about one mile away from the Johnson Space Center..
have a nice rant...err...day


On the other hand NASA/ESA is using normal off-the-self batteries on ISS laptops. Albeit every battery lot is tested and x-rayed.
 

Offline jerry507

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 247
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #135 on: February 17, 2013, 12:00:59 am »
Airbus has stated they will use the lithium ion batteries when they figure out what the problems are. They're only switching because they don't want to delay delivery because of FAA uncertainty about the lithium ion batteries.

They made this decision really quickly pretty late in the project, I assume the batteries are very similar. They're even saying they'll switch the batteries on the current test planes to get test flights going again ASAP (they were put on hold because of the Boeing problems).
 

Online SeanB

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 16349
  • Country: za
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #136 on: February 17, 2013, 06:16:12 am »
2 standard aircraft NiCd batteries will fit in the space of the one LiIon unit, only needs a change in the bracketry, and then some attention to the charge circuitry to handle it's voltage current curves. Might have only half the capacity though, and will be heavier. Current delivery ability though will be very impressive.
 

Offline Colfaxmingo

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 26
  • Two of me would be to much
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #137 on: February 18, 2013, 03:37:36 pm »
Can't get a CR2032 coin cell in individually wrapped plastic shipped air because science reasons will make the plain burst into flames seconds after take off.

Put big Frappin ass cells in a hot box under load for hours and hours.

Boeing is a shit company run by bean counters that make products sold to bean counters.
Airbus is no better.
Rare Medium Well Done
 

Offline fcb

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2125
  • Country: gb
  • Test instrument designer/G1YWC
    • Electron Plus
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #138 on: February 18, 2013, 03:41:35 pm »
Looking forward to my next flight on the plane built by your aerospace company Colfaxmingo. :-DD
https://electron.plus Power Analysers, VI Signature Testers, Voltage References, Picoammeters, Curve Tracers.
 

Offline JoeyP

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 321
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #139 on: February 18, 2013, 08:21:10 pm »
@Colfaxmingo

Even one of you might be too much ;)
 

Offline N2IXK

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 722
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #140 on: February 21, 2013, 01:19:50 am »
Japan's Transport Safety Board finds evidence of "miswiring":

http://business.time.com/2013/02/20/japan-probe-finds-miswiring-of-boeing-787-battery/

As usual with technical issues, details in the mainstream press are muddled to nonexistent. The JTSB report is available as a .pdf here:

http://www.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/flash/JA804A_130116-130220.pdf

, but only in Japanese. Anyone able to read it and give us details?

"My favorite programming language is...SOLDER!"--Robert A. Pease
 

Offline chickenTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 257
  • Country: us
  • Rusty Coder
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #141 on: March 16, 2013, 12:11:37 am »
Warming up an old thread: Boeing: ‘No fire is possible’ with 787 battery fix
http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020561865_787batterybriefingxml.html

Sounds a bit like a "we don't know exactly why it happened, but let's fix everything that could possibly go wrong and contain it behind an inch of steel to be really safe" solution.
 

Offline chickenTopic starter

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 257
  • Country: us
  • Rusty Coder
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #142 on: March 16, 2013, 12:28:31 am »
An interesting snippet from the article:

Quote
"Sinnett also quibbled with the use of the term “thermal runaway” — an uncontrolled battery overheating.

That’s something that occurred in the two events that prompted the grounding of the 787 fleet — the fire aboard a 787 on the ground in Boston and a battery smoldering in flight in Japan — according to both investigating authorities: the National Transportation Safety Board and the Japan Transport Safety Board.

But Sinnett said the term has different uses according to different “perspectives” and that the only one that really matters to Boeing is at the “airplane level.”

At that level, he insisted, thermal runaway did not happen.

He said there was no fire on the Japanese flight. And in the case of the Boston fire, only some small flames were observed outside the box, “where there was oxygen,” but no fire inside the battery."

Is there a fire if nobody can smell it?  :palm:

Quote
Sinnett said that “we may never get to the single root cause” of the two battery events in service, but that the package of changes covers all possibilities and is the “most robust process we’ve ever followed in improving a part.”

Reiterates my description above. I think you call that Murphy's Cat - if you don't look inside the box there's no way to tell whether what could go wrong went wrong or not.  ;)
« Last Edit: March 16, 2013, 12:30:53 am by chicken »
 

Online tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6817
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #143 on: March 16, 2013, 12:29:38 am »
I'm worried. Did they find what caused the original failure and solve that, or did they just make the battery more rugged against future failures due to such faults?
 

Offline JoeyP

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 321
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #144 on: March 16, 2013, 12:49:53 am »
It looks like they're "shot-gunning" it because they didn't find the root cause. That is troubling. I accept that it may very well be possible to contain the fire when there's a failure, but it looks like they expect continued failures. That will keep the issue in the news and possibly doom the 787 to the same fate as the DC10. I hope they are also working on a long-term design change which eliminates that battery chemistry altogether.
 

Offline ee851

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 122
  • Country: us
  • carbon-based caveman
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #145 on: March 16, 2013, 03:38:42 pm »
Can't vouche for the Romans. All that's left of them here are piles of rubble and the occasional landmark.
Not so.    Roman aqueducts still stand, and still work.   Roman arches still stand.    Architecture in the USA and throughout Europe is largely based on Roman engineering.    For example, the Cathedral of Learning at the University of Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh, PA is a  replica of a gothic cathedral like the basilica.     Examples too numerous to mention have been built over centuries since the Roman empire  fell -- throughout Europe and the New World--basically all copies of Roman structures.

Even though the Roman Empire predated the Renaissance, technologies invented by Roman engineers made the modern city possible.     The Roman Empire was a powerhouse of engineering, then, as now, first to wage war against foreign armies, then to make comfortable and durable cities.

The only reason the Roman water system isn't used today is that it used lead pipes, and lead wasn't found to be poisonous until the twentieth century.     Most other modern infrastructural engineering marvels--highways, arched bridges, vaulted cathedrals, canal systems, city sewage, NYC water supply, shipbuilding yards, docks, etc., are based on technologies used by the Roman Empire.   For example, Roman engineers invented concrete.

The only manmade structures that still exist on this planet which are older than works of Roman architecture are the Egyptian pyramids.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2013, 03:42:48 pm by ee851 »
 

Offline grumpydoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2906
  • Country: gb
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #146 on: March 16, 2013, 03:47:54 pm »
Quote
The only manmade structures that still exist on this planet which are older than works of Roman architecture are the Egyptian pyramids.

Umm, Stonehenge, probably some of the Mayan and Greek temples and the megalithic temples on Malta spring to mind as  man-made structures which pre-date the Romans but which aren't Egyptian. I'm sure there are others. Admittedly in Europe Roman structure vastly outnumber other ancient buildings.
 

Offline icon

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 246
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #147 on: March 16, 2013, 04:07:13 pm »
Newgrange?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

 

Offline MacAttak

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Country: us
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #148 on: March 16, 2013, 06:01:01 pm »
The only manmade structures that still exist on this planet which are older than works of Roman architecture are the Egyptian pyramids.

But those aren't manmade.


Sorry, but it had to be done.  :-DD



 

Offline staxquad

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 417
  • Country: ca
  • Eye Candy
Re: Boeing 787 Li-Ion Meltdown
« Reply #149 on: March 16, 2013, 08:53:20 pm »
Warming up an old thread: Boeing: ‘No fire is possible’ with 787 battery fix
http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020561865_787batterybriefingxml.html

Sounds a bit like a "we don't know exactly why it happened, but let's fix everything that could possibly go wrong and contain it behind an inch of steel to be really safe" solution.

150 of those $15,000 batteries had to be replaced in the fleet of 50 over a year period, so something is cooking.

They say they aren't over charging those batteries, but since they are being worn out, they might be over drawn.
They use them for backup (not used until the engines shut down) and the brakes, but they brake on the ground and don't expect engine shutdowns so aren't worried?

Tighter voltages?  How about tighter current draw? (Or laying out what is going on instead of obfuscation and denial)
Tighter voltages might be a hint that maybe the batteries are losing their balance and a cell is either going too low a voltage in use or too high while recharging.
 
More insulation to keep isolated (and insulated to keep them warmer?)  The cells still suffer from being folded and stacked,  They should be flat and in single file which would make the package taller and longer, but immune from damaging the adjacent cells and with zero problems when there are no folds in the cells. 

Using 18650 cells would be safer, but they don't want the extra few pounds the package would weigh?

They aren't convincing in their fix.

Everlasting battery stink until they come clean.

« Last Edit: March 17, 2013, 09:36:21 pm by staxquad »
"TEPCO Fukushima you long time"
You say Vegemite, I say Yosemite. (Ve-gem-mit-tee, Yo-zey-might)  
"For starters : you're Canadian...."
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf