| General > General Technical Chat |
| LG Battery BS |
| << < (8/10) > >> |
| Bud:
It was Jobs who introduced that tradition of appearance in a sloppy outfit in front of a gigantic screen with a single word displayed, wasnt it. |
| amyk:
--- Quote from: nctnico on February 02, 2020, 08:58:35 pm ---Well... these are the results for testing new cells according to the UN38.3 regulations. These regulations also have requirements for the battery management systems. --- End quote --- BMS has nothing to do with those tests, which basically say that you can abuse the cells that much, and it may damage them, and they might even set fire to something else (something that can happen with any high-energy cell) but they should still not explode nor ignite themselves. If LG's cells don't pass those tests then they have some serious explaining to do. --- Quote from: ogden on February 03, 2020, 11:11:39 pm ---Amazing that nobody here blames manufacturers of inherently unsafe vape devices. --- End quote --- If those vapes all used C or D cells, would companies like Energizer or Duracell write such disclaimers or produce fearmongering videos about it? LG brought it on themselves by trying to tightly control what should really be none of their business. Safety warnings and instructions for handling, yes. "stay away from our batteries", no. Observe that Samsung and Sony's disclaimers are more level-headed and specifically targeted towards vapes, and that's likely only because of the threat of lawsuits mentioned before. Unlike LG, they still want you to buy their products. |
| ogden:
--- Quote from: EEVblog on February 04, 2020, 01:46:52 am ---Sony didn't spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on a highly produced scaremongering info-mercial that actually contains no real info. --- End quote --- If you think that message "Our _bare_ cells are not for consumer use" is not real info - fine. Let me ask: as an EE do you think that everything is fine with bare 18650 cells and products like vape devices that are designed to exclusively use such? --- Quote from: amyk on February 04, 2020, 04:26:36 am ---Observe that Samsung and Sony's disclaimers are more level-headed and specifically targeted towards vapes, and that's likely only because of the threat of lawsuits mentioned before. Unlike LG, they still want you to buy their products. --- End quote --- Right. :-DD Sony quote: "The Sony Li-Ion Cells are sold to manufacturers and meant to power products like power tools that contain certain safety precautions and mechanisms which meet our quality standards.". Samsung quote: "DO NOT charge individual, cylindrical Lithium-Ion Batteries if you are a consumer or end-user." |
| nctnico:
--- Quote from: amyk on February 04, 2020, 04:26:36 am --- --- Quote from: nctnico on February 02, 2020, 08:58:35 pm ---Well... these are the results for testing new cells according to the UN38.3 regulations. These regulations also have requirements for the battery management systems. --- End quote --- BMS has nothing to do with those tests, which basically say that you can abuse the cells that much, and it may damage them --- End quote --- Did you actually read the UN38.3? If you did you'd know that the BMS is an integral part of battery pack safety testing. Testing whether the cells withstand physical abuse is just one part of it. |
| Siwastaja:
--- Quote from: amyk on February 02, 2020, 08:18:16 pm ---In other words, according to the datasheet, their cells should not be exploding or catching fire when subjected to those abuses, and those that do are defective.... :-// --- End quote --- Yes, the modern cell-level safety features are quite remarkable; in fact, I have "verified" all of the listed conditions on a few cells, and I haven't been able to produce a fire on a good-brand 18650 cell, ever. Including over-charging a cell with 30V, 10A supply for an hour or so. A bit of electrolyte smell is all I get. However, there is something you miss: it's the rate of risk going up, as the layers of safety are being bypassed. These cell-level safety layers are good, but not perfectly reliable. They only exist for the worst case (BMS failure, mechanical failure of external case), and need to be cheap on production level. If you have thousands of cells being abused outside normal specifications, some may catastrophically fail, even if the datasheet specifies it shouldn't happen. You may also hit some strange combination of corner cases which isn't covered by the few standardized tests; the cell might comply to the standards, and still fail catastrophically, using a modified test with different parameters. I'm against scaremongering, quite the opposite, I want to say, do whatever you want, the brand cells are quite robust against abuse. Just be aware that you are doing something not originally intended to be that way. Do it on purpose, understand there is a risk, however small, and be safe. Also understand that a manufacturer needs to take a strong stance for such non-intended purpose, for legal reasons. Another option would be to provide protected cells and give consumer support for them; clearly, it's outside their core business. Of course, producing an expensive PR video seems stupid at least, but companies do such things, maybe don't take it too seriously, keep using the cells as you wish. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |