It looks bad, but is consistent with other conclusions from VAF threads - put it in a stainless steel box and vent overboard. At least it did not burst into flames. And take an airplane with it.
Now the discussion about what set it off. . .
United Airlines had trouble with Lithium batteries on their new 787's. FAA grounded them for a while. I think one started smoking on the ramp in Japan. Don't know what Boeing did for a fix, but it might be worth looking into. (I "think" something about a sealed box and ventilation is what I heard, but I'm honestly not sure)
Just a thought.
United Airlines had trouble with Lithium batteries on their new 787's. FAA grounded them for a while. I think one started smoking on the ramp in Japan. Don't know what Boeing did for a fix, but it might be worth looking into. (I "think" something about a sealed box and ventilation is what I heard, but I'm honestly not sure)
Just a thought.
Just to keep this thread on track, I do not believe that the 787 Lithium battery was a Lithium IRON battery.
My personal stance is that I will not allow any large format or high-power capacity (more than a cell phone or ipad) lithium ion batteries of any chemistry in or on my airplane. Especially one that I can't chuck out the window if necessary. I suppose I do need to think about how to throw a cell phone out of my slider canopy if it were to vent.
I heard that a car crashed last week. No way am I getting back in another car. They're dangerous.
Folks, let's see what the cause was. Lithium doesn't always equal fire, smoke, or an emergency. Done correctly it can have great benefits.
Give that man a dollar!
I completely agree. While some talk about risk analysis, I suspect it's more of a casual term rather than a serious look at the situation. When I replaced the PC-680 with a Shorai LiFePO4 in my -6A a year ago, I was quite content with the risks and mitigations as identified via an FMEA exercise.
Guess I'm just curious why some here offer so many repeated objections over the Li chemistry battery choice. Thank you! But we get it. There are other considerations using these batteries. The archives will reflect your objections.I'm curious about the risk analysis you've done. Have you done a test to show how much smoke would enter the cockpit should the battery melt down? Is the plane flyable in that condition? How much of that type of smoke would it take to incapacitate the pilot? What financial protections does your family have should you become incapacitated and plummet into a house or a school?
This discussion and those like it are public and easily found. An attorney fresh out of school will be calling the failure and its consequences easily foreseen...and your build not only liable but negligent.
My job requires daily and constant risk analysis. I've dealt with those attorneys and had to defend my actions. It's less than enjoyable, and I had done everything right with no liability. Defending this battery tech would be significantly more difficult with all of the failures out there. Sure, the FAA allows it under experimental conditions but that does not release you from liability. It places that liability directly on you the manufacturer...and your family....and assets...and future assets.
Sit down and think worst possible scenario versus best possible benefit. Worst....you kill yourself, your neighbors grandson who you offered a ride to and a school bus filled with children. Best possible benefit, you climb an unmeasurable amount faster and your W&B has a slightly smaller number on it. If a battery is significantly affecting your weight and balance or carrying capacity...you've built something wrong.
I'm curious about the risk analysis you've done. Have you done a test to show how much smoke would enter the cockpit should the battery melt down? Is the plane flyable in that condition? How much of that type of smoke would it take to incapacitate the pilot? What financial protections does your family have should you become incapacitated and plummet into a house or a school?
This discussion and those like it are public and easily found. An attorney fresh out of school will be calling the failure and its consequences easily foreseen...and your build not only liable but negligent.
My job requires daily and constant risk analysis. I've dealt with those attorneys and had to defend my actions. It's less than enjoyable, and I had done everything right with no liability. Defending this battery tech would be significantly more difficult with all of the failures out there. Sure, the FAA allows it under experimental conditions but that does not release you from liability. It places that liability directly on you the manufacturer...and your family....and assets...and future assets.
Sit down and think worst possible scenario versus best possible benefit. Worst....you kill yourself, your neighbors grandson who you offered a ride to and a school bus filled with children. Best possible benefit, you climb an unmeasurable amount faster and your W&B has a slightly smaller number on it. If a battery is significantly affecting your weight and balance or carrying capacity...you've built something wrong.
Doesn't that argument work just as well just for flying any aircraft regardless of battery choice? Engines fail - there are stats to prove it - so isn't that a foreseeable event that could have the same effect?
Eliminating risk isn't the point. Minimizing risk is.
I'm curious about the risk analysis you've done. Have you done a test to show how much smoke would enter the cockpit should the battery melt down? Is the plane flyable in that condition? How much of that type of smoke would it take to incapacitate the pilot? What financial protections does your family have should you become incapacitated and plummet into a house or a school?
Folks, if you are considering a lithium ion battery of any type in your aircraft or other vehicle, do yourselves a favor and read the recently released NTSB report on the JAL 787 Yuasa battery failure. It includes information related to two other lithium chemistry battery failures on the 787 fleet.
Lithium Colbalt Oxide is a very different makeup than Lithium Iron Phosphate, with significantly different characteristics.
A much better link for learning about the characteristics of lithium chemistry batteries will take you to Battery University: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/types_of_lithium_ion
I am aware of the difference in chemistries. The report notes mechanically induced failure modes that could be common to any number of different battery chemistries. In addition, there are other items that users should want to be aware of that are addressed in the report, such as the quality of manufacturing quality control processes. Again, I'm not making a case for or against these batteries, merely suggesting that everyone avail themselves of all sources of information.
Having on the other side of the firewall would be better. But would you not be comfortable directing the battery box vent through the firewall and overboard somehow? Is the box vented currently?I've got a Shorai in the front baggage compartment of my 8. However, it is in a stainless box, I have my EIS set to alarm for an over voltage condition, and I have a very small alternator (SD20 only) which will likely fry itself even before the crowbar fails.
I am not going to get rid of the Shorai, but having read this and using the 'just in case' rule, it will soon be moved to the firewall as low and cool as possible. That's enough caution for me. If I want to rule out every possible battery incident, I'll fly my no-electrics Biplane. But then I have to hand prop...
I've got a Shorai in the front baggage compartment of my 8. However, it is in a stainless box, I have my EIS set to alarm for an over voltage condition, and I have a very small alternator (SD20 only) which will likely fry itself even before the crowbar fails.
I am not going to get rid of the Shorai, but having read this and using the 'just in case' rule, it will soon be moved to the firewall as low and cool as possible. That's enough caution for me. If I want to rule out every possible battery incident, I'll fly my no-electrics Biplane. But then I have to hand prop...
Was this battery being charged, or shorted to ground?
The battery was not being charged or shorted. Here is a continuation of the discussion...
"None of your questions matter to me. There should be no failure mode that would allow this to happen. So what if my voltage regulator failed in flight? This still should not happen.
So what if I am an idiot and used the wrong charger? ( I didn't) In fact on the ACS website under specifications for the Aerovoltz, it says no special charger needed. Still should not happen. The battery was connected to the plane, but nothing was turned on. The battery was taken off a two amp charger at least two hours before it burned. Cutting the cables did nothing to slow the battery fire, cutting them only let me get the battery out of the plane faster. Took about two minutes on google to find a photo of a EarthX that had a big hole burned into the side of it. Other than a structural failure, tell me of another failure mode that leaves you with no options. Well I guess if you have a BRS and a structural failure you would still have a good chance. a BRS would not help you in this battery fire scenario. The amount of smoke it emitted in the beginning was appalling, I wish I could have got a video of that. "
As a holder of a patent on lithium ion battery charging and protection, i would never use one in my RV or fly in a non certified plane with one. It just is not worth the risk. I feel LiIon batteries are too dependent on manufacturing defects to keep them safe for airplane use. Also the cold at altitude and other environmental factors may (over)stress the battery. They are great for model airplanes and consumer electronics one can chuck out the window if they get too hot in flight. This is my opinion based on what I know of the physics of Li ion batteries. I feel I have to speak out becuase most pilots dont know what they dont know about the dangers of Li Ion technology for RV use.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that lithium iron phosphate (LiFePo) is actually a type of lithium ion battery?