In 2006 lab test, 787 battery blew up, burned down building...

[TMMT]

In 2006 lab test, 787 battery blew up, burned down building...

http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2020199686_787batterysafetyxml.html

 

[ksu_aviator]

The point of testing isn't to see how it works under ideal conditions. The point of testing is to force it to fail to see what happens. The fact that the building burned down tells us that the battery can catch fire and nothing more. The building burned for its own defects and probably poor test design.

 

[dicko]

The point of testing isn't to see how it works under ideal conditions. The point of testing is to force it to fail to see what happens. The fact that the building burned down tells us that the battery can catch fire and nothing more. The building burned for its own defects and probably poor test design.

So ....... the same company that makes the battery chargers for the 787 burns down their own building during testing, and you're not concerned ?

Have you ever considered a career with the FAA ?

 

[jmreii]

Must be the same organization in which certifies a particular aircraft for known icing conditions only to go back and change it under the threat of lawsuits. Testing standards were worthless to begin with leading a person to believe money is worth more than a human life!

 

[bri5150]

The point of testing isn't to see how it works under ideal conditions. The point of testing is to force it to fail to see what happens. The fact that the building burned down tells us that the battery can catch fire and nothing more. The building burned for its own defects and probably poor test design.

While your point is valid, at the very least, this is VERY bad PR.

 

[ackattacker]

The point of testing isn't to see how it works under ideal conditions. The point of testing is to force it to fail to see what happens. The fact that the building burned down tells us that the battery can catch fire and nothing more. The building burned for its own defects and probably poor test design.

Well, that's a bit simplistic. Sometimes the point of testing is to force it to fail, and sometimes it's just to gather operational parameters (i.e. how it DOES work under normal conditions).

IF the point of that particular test was to "force it to fail", then presumably they would have expected failure and taken precautions so that a failure wouldn't burn down the building.

BTW there are many different kinds of Lithium battery chemistry. Some more volatile than others. From what I've read, the 787 batteries utilize the Lithium Cobalt Dioxide chemistry, similar to most laptop computers, and considered the least safe although they have very high energy density. Most electric cars such as the Chevy Volt utilize Lithium Manganese Dioxide which is slightly less energy dense but is much less susceptible to thermal runaway so it's far better from a safety and liability standpoint. There's also Lithium Iron Phosphate, which is even less energy dense but is considered extremely safe.

RC hobbiests have gone through this whole debate. The statistics of people burning down their house or car while charging RC lithium batteries are frightening. Now many RC enthusiasts are switching to Lithium Iron Phosphate even though it has less energy density.

 

[dicko]

While your point is valid, at the very least, this is VERY bad PR.

The company that burnt down their own building wasnt testing the battery. They were testing the charger they designed and built. A separate company designed and built the battery.

All the 'burn down our own building' company proved, was they're battery charger didn't work very well when attached to a battery. They also sent defective chargers to Boeing. The FAA said that didn't count, because the chargers were never installed. :erm:

 

[ackattacker]

http://www.luxresearchinc.com/news-and-events/press-releases/148.html

Interesting read.

 

[Stukadriver]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8R0ig0J4wk

This is a good demo, if you can put up with the sales pitch.

 

[Jar Jar]

Must be the same organization in which certifies a particular aircraft for known icing conditions only to go back and change it under the threat of lawsuits. Testing standards were worthless to begin with leading a person to believe money is worth more than a human life!

Didn't you read the NPRM on the rest rules? A Human life is worth ~$5M.