Re: lithium explosion

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

On 13/04/2024 3:39 am, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
 

On 12/04/2024 6:55 pm, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
>

... if
it had a safe place to dissipate the stored energy.

>
What if it didn't?

>
Then it probably needs to include a louder hooter and brilliant flashing
lights to serve the same purpose, if more slowly than a purpose designed
dissipator.
>

..was being looked
after by somebody who ignored the early warnings.

>
That includes 99% of battery users who wouldn't know what to do it they
noticed the warnings or wouldn't be able to do it anyway.

>
A voice message could be pretty explicit. All the message needs to say
is to move the battery outside to where it can't do much damage if it
bursts into flames. EV car batteries are big enough that that's quite a
way, but cars are designed to move appreciable distances.

 
It's not really a very good selling point.  "Oh, by the way, this model
has the latest upgrade and tells you when it is going to explode, so you
can get out of the way".

 
You don't seem to have been paying attention. If you deal with the
warning by discharging the battery, and making it safe, it won't explode.

Who it the 'you' in that sentence?  Do you mean the average user,  in
which case this is a hopeless scenario as most users of batteries
wouldn't have a clue. 

Until recently batteries have been inherently safe: unless you did
something stupid they were unlikely to give any trouble.  You are now
supporting a type of battery that is inherently unsafe and will catch
fire or explode unless the user takes some positive action.  Even if the
user delegates this action to an automated system there is no guarantee
that the action will be taken every time it is needed.

'Safety' that depends on taking a positive action to prevent a disaster
is not safe at all.


--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk