---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 10/28/16: 15 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 09:03 AM - Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (rampil) 2. 10:55 AM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Charlie England) 3. 11:17 AM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Ken Ryan) 4. 11:50 AM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Charlie England) 5. 11:51 AM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (C&K) 6. 12:01 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Lyle Peterson) 7. 12:20 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Ken Ryan) 8. 12:54 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 01:39 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 02:07 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (A R Goldman) 11. 02:51 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Charlie England) 12. 03:33 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (bobsv35b@aol.com) 13. 03:41 PM - Re: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 14. 04:56 PM - What Causes Battery to Go Bad (William Hunter) 15. 07:05 PM - Re: Z16 Rotax 912 problem (romaja) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 09:03:47 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot From: "rampil" Adding a log to the fire 8) Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=461683#461683 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 10:55:33 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot From: Charlie England And continuing with that logic, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a fuel explosion somewhere. ;-) Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong problem doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion batteries for primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) Charlie On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: > > Adding a log to the fire 8) > Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! > > https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ > > -------- > Ira N224XS > ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 11:17:13 AM PST US From: Ken Ryan Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot Not sure where you came up with that one. Nearly everyone I know with an experimental is now using a lithium battery (and a few certified guys on the sly). Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve. On Oct 28, 2016 10:02 AM, "Charlie England" wrote: > ceengland7@gmail.com> > > And continuing with that logic, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo > we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a fuel > explosion somewhere. > ;-) > Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong problem > doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion batteries for > primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) > > Charlie > > On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: > >> >> Adding a log to the fire 8) >> Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! >> >> https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure- >> wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ >> >> -------- >> Ira N224XS >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:50:18 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot From: Charlie England Maybe, but I strongly doubt that they are using a Lithium *ION* battery for their primary battery in their a/c. They are almost certainly using Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries (with built-in battery management). If they really are using Lithium *ION* batteries, then they really do need to see the video that Ira posted. https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=lithium%20ion%20vs%20lithium%20iron There are many different battery chemistries that include lithium in the mix; and they can have very different characteristics. Charlie On 10/28/2016 1:16 PM, Ken Ryan wrote: > > Not sure where you came up with that one. Nearly everyone I know with > an experimental is now using a lithium battery (and a few certified > guys on the sly). > > Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve. > > > On Oct 28, 2016 10:02 AM, "Charlie England" > wrote: > > > > > And continuing with that logic, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo > > we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a > fuel explosion somewhere. > ;-) > Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong > problem doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion > batteries for primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) > > Charlie > > On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: > > > > > Adding a log to the fire 8) > Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft > design! > > https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ > > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > =================================== > - > Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > =================================== > FORUMS - > eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > =================================== > WIKI - > errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com > =================================== > b Site - > -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > =================================== > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 11:51:54 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot From: C&K Don't confuse Lithium ION with newer, safer, Lithium IRON phosphate despite the similar sounding names. Ken On 28/10/2016 2:16 PM, Ken Ryan wrote: > > Not sure where you came up with that one. Nearly everyone I know with > an experimental is now using a lithium battery (and a few certified > guys on the sly). > > Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve. > > > On Oct 28, 2016 10:02 AM, "Charlie England" > wrote: > > > > > And continuing with that logic, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo > > we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a > fuel explosion somewhere. > ;-) > Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong > problem doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion > batteries for primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) > > Charlie > > On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: > > > > > Adding a log to the fire 8) > Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft > design! > > https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ > > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > =================================== > - > Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" > target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > =================================== > FORUMS - > eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com > =================================== > WIKI - > errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com > =================================== > b Site - > -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution > =================================== > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 12:01:11 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot From: Lyle Peterson The headline distorts the facts. Yes, lithium batteries will cumbust if they aren't handled properly and carefully. So too will dynamite explode if not handled carefully. Gasoline vapors will burn if an ignition source is provided. Lead/acid batteries will explode. There is a control circuit built in to lithium battery packs that monitors the voltage and the cell temperature. It is there for a very good reason - To reduce the likelihood of a cell being overcharged or overheated and thus starting to burn. The next time the battery in your laptop fails completely take it apart, carefully. You will find a small circuit board in the battery. It is connected to each set of paralleled cells. There is also a thermistor connected to the board that monitors the pack temperature. It is this control that the engineers forgot to enable. It is also dangerous to go to bed. People die there. So too it is dangerous to get up in the morning. "Let's be careful out there." On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: > > Adding a log to the fire 8) > Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! > > https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=461683#461683 > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 12:20:51 PM PST US From: Ken Ryan Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot It is my understanding that all of the lithium batteries (including LiFePO) fall under the general category of "lithium ion." My source is Battery University, here: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/lithium_based_batteries and here: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/types_of_lithium_ion Ken On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Charlie England wrote: > Maybe, but I strongly doubt that they are using a Lithium *ION* battery > for their primary battery in their a/c. They are almost certainly using > Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries (with built-in battery management). If > they really are using Lithium *ION* batteries, then they really do need to > see the video that Ira posted. > > https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1& > espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=lithium%20ion%20vs%20lithium%20iron > > There are many different battery chemistries that include lithium in the > mix; and they can have very different characteristics. > > Charlie > > On 10/28/2016 1:16 PM, Ken Ryan wrote: > > Not sure where you came up with that one. Nearly everyone I know with an > experimental is now using a lithium battery (and a few certified guys on > the sly). > > Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve. > > On Oct 28, 2016 10:02 AM, "Charlie England" wrote: > >> ceengland7@gmail.com> >> >> And continuing with that logic, >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo >> we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a fuel >> explosion somewhere. >> ;-) >> Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong problem >> doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion batteries for >> primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) >> >> Charlie >> >> On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: >> >>> >>> Adding a log to the fire 8) >>> Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! >>> >>> https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure- >>> wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ >>> >>> -------- >>> Ira N224XS >>> >>> >> >> =================================== >> - >> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www. >> matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List >> =================================== >> FORUMS - >> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >> =================================== >> WIKI - >> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com >> =================================== >> b Site - >> -Matt Dralle, List Admin. >> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >> =================================== >> >> >> >> > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:54:26 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot At 11:02 AM 10/28/2016, you wrote: > >Adding a log to the fire 8) >Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! . . . a point I've tried to illuminate for several years. In the articles I did for Kit Planes on batteies, a question I posed to owner/ops of OBAM aircraft asked them to consider: "suppose you DO take 10 pounds out of the empty weight of your aircraft . . . now what?" By how many feet will this reduce landing/takeoff roll? By how many feet/min will this increase rated of climb? By what amount will this increase cruising speed, fuel efficiency or service ceiling? If 10 pounds comes off the airframe, will the fuel capacity grow by 10 pounds? Next to last, whan was the last time you delay launch into the wild blue to off-load fuel or luggage because you were . . . say . . . 20# over gross? Finally, what is the return on investment for having expended $xxx versus $yyy in the selection of your flight battery. Consider the economics of having to be more cognizant of the $xxx battery's special vulnerabilities for inadvertent, permanent damage thus trashing what ever service life remained. Burt Rutan went through hundreds of similar weight effects analysis decisions because his mission aircraft tool 5 pounds of fuel to carry one pound of airplane around the world. One pound of empty weight reduction was a 6 pound reduction of takeoff weight. But the battery in our airplane is but one of few opportunities for weight reduction . . . with costs that may well be difficult if not impossible to justify economically. To be sure, there are numerous Lithium products crafted for use in airplanes demonstrated to present little or no risk over their lead-acid counterpart. But NASA robots, hoverboards, cell phones, laptops, etc. are different markets with trade-offs in design that have nothing to do with aircraft. The aviation battery market is infinitely more sophisticated than for those factories that power up fire-prone hoverboards . . . http://tinyurl.com/zdlf65d . . . so it's up to US to evaluate the potential benefit/risk ratio for bolting a new battery into our airplane. Do it for reasons that make good sense to you and KNOW your supplier. Right now, LiIPo is the chemistry of choice paired with capable battery management electronics not unlike EarthX, TrueBlue and no doubt, others. In my not so humble opinion, whoever was in charge of the battery system on that NASA robot project should be VERY carefully screened at his/her next performance review. I could tell some tales too on individuals with poor judgement on alternator selection for another taxpayer funded project . . . Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 01:39:43 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot At 01:59 PM 10/28/2016, you wrote: > > >The headline distorts the facts. Yes, lithium batteries will >cumbust if they aren't handled properly and carefully. So too will >dynamite explode if not handled carefully. Gasoline vapors will >burn if an ignition source is provided. Lead/acid batteries will explode. Agreed. I've often suggested that the step up from lead-acid to lithium was akin to figuring out how to burn nitroglycerin in our engine. Great power to weight ratio but with practical problems. >There is a control circuit built in to lithium battery packs that >monitors the voltage and the cell temperature. It is there for a >very good reason - To reduce the likelihood of a cell being >overcharged or overheated and thus starting to burn. It's not an automatic thing. I've dissected the little 'pillow' batteries used in my grand-children's helicopters and found tiny etched circuit boards of unknown quality or performance . . . but yes, there was some form of electronic 'smarts'. At the same time, there are manufacturers of all manner of lithium products who may or may not include such features . . . perhaps expecting the system integrator to add the necessary electronics. The TrueBlue certified batteries are huge arrays of cylindrical cells . . . manufactured by A123 if memory serves. I'm pretty sure these cells are raw chemistry with no 'smarts'. I'll dissect some 18650 cells I have on hand one of these days and see what's inside them . . . at MOST it will be a fuse or other current limiting device. there is NO protection for over discharge or over charge. I'm pretty sure there's no 'smarts' in an AeroVolts product and there have been a few 'melt downs' that behaved more like burning enclosures than of a lithium fed fire. The word 'lithium' is only a imperative to inquire deeper into how it is compounded and implemented from the system perspective. Further, 'news' stories about exploding batteries have little if any relevance to our deliberations. Yeah, lithium has some risks as does gasoline or even lead-acid. The trick is to reduce those risks in a manner that would make Walter Beech or Duane Wallace proud. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 02:07:03 PM PST US From: A R Goldman Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot Not so sure you are correct about that last statement. Perhaps that is your own prejudice. Additionally everybody seems to be lumping lithium batteries in one groups independent of the fact that there are various chemistries each involving lithium but each with its unique power density and safety. It would be a great idea if when talking(writing) that the specific type of chemistry of the battery is stated so that the conversation begins to have some real meaning. Rich Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 28, 2016, at 12:54 PM, Charlie England wrote: > > > And continuing with that logic, > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo > we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a fuel explosion somewhere. > ;-) > Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong problem doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion batteries for primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) > > Charlie > >> On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: >> >> Adding a log to the fire 8) >> Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! >> >> https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure-wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ >> >> -------- >> Ira N224XS >> > > > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 02:51:53 PM PST US From: Charlie England Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot I suppose you could make a case for that; lithium ions are likely participants in all the various chemistries. However, the only chemistry that seems to be in common use for starting and primary reserve energy in homebuilts isLithium Iron Phosphate(LiFePO4) If you look at the links in the google search I referenced earlier, the FePLiO4 typically compared to 'lithium ion' when evaluating suitability and safety. (ex: http://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-generation-distribution/123906-comparison-of-lithium-ion-to-lithium-iron-battery/) Technically, the 'lithium ion' they are talking about is likely to be lithium cobalt or lithium manganese. But colloquial terms are typically 'lithium ion' vs 'lithium iron' when discussing them. While it's possible that NASA was using lithium iron in that robot and the reporter used the catchall 'lithium ion' to describe it, it's more likely it was something other than lithium iron phosphate (probably lithium cobalt). Understand, I'm not advocating the use of FePLiO4; For me, it's still too expensive (and still a bit more risky) than a regular SLA. But I wouldn't be terrified to fly with someone using one. Not sure I could say the same for a lithium ion (cobalt or manganese) battery. Does that help? Charlie On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Ken Ryan wrote: > It is my understanding that all of the lithium batteries (including > LiFePO) fall under the general category of "lithium ion." My source is > Battery University, here: > > http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/lithium_based_batteries > > and here: > > http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/types_of_lithium_ion > > Ken > > > On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Charlie England > wrote: > >> Maybe, but I strongly doubt that they are using a Lithium *ION* battery >> for their primary battery in their a/c. They are almost certainly using >> Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries (with built-in battery management). If >> they really are using Lithium *ION* batteries, then they really do need to >> see the video that Ira posted. >> >> https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&e >> spv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=lithium%20ion%20vs%20lithium%20iron >> >> There are many different battery chemistries that include lithium in the >> mix; and they can have very different characteristics. >> >> Charlie >> >> On 10/28/2016 1:16 PM, Ken Ryan wrote: >> >> Not sure where you came up with that one. Nearly everyone I know with an >> experimental is now using a lithium battery (and a few certified guys on >> the sly). >> >> Sent from my Android. Sorry Steve. >> >> On Oct 28, 2016 10:02 AM, "Charlie England" wrote: >> >>> ceengland7@gmail.com> >>> >>> And continuing with that logic, >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RocketMotorTwo >>> we should all convert our planes to gliders, since there was a fuel >>> explosion somewhere. >>> ;-) >>> Caution in aviation is a good idea, but worrying about the wrong problem >>> doesn't help. (Virtually no one thinks using Lithium Ion batteries for >>> primary electrical power in a homebuilt is a good idea.) >>> >>> Charlie >>> >>> On 10/28/2016 11:02 AM, rampil wrote: >>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> Adding a log to the fire 8) >>>> Weight savings isn't always the only consideration in aircraft design! >>>> >>>> https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/28/lithium-battery-failure- >>>> wipes-out-darpa-robot-at-nasa/ >>>> >>>> -------- >>>> Ira N224XS >>>> >>>> >>> >>> =================================== >>> - >>> Electric-List" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.mat >>> ronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List >>> =================================== >>> FORUMS - >>> eferrer" target="_blank">http://forums.matronics.com >>> =================================== >>> WIKI - >>> errer" target="_blank">http://wiki.matronics.com >>> =================================== >>> b Site - >>> -Matt Dralle, List Admin. >>> rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution >>> =================================== >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 03:33:59 PM PST US From: bobsv35b@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot Good Evening Bob, As usual, very informative! Happy Skies, Old Bob -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Fri, Oct 28, 2016 3:40 pm Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot At 01:59 PM 10/28/2016, you wrote: --> AeroElectric-List messageposted by: Lyle Peterson The headline distorts the facts. Yes, lithium batteries willcumbust if they aren't handled properly and carefully. So too willdynamite explode if not handled carefully. Gasoline vapors willburn if an ignition source is provided. Lead/acid batteries willexplode. Agreed. I've often suggested that the step up from lead-acid to lithium was akin to figuring out how to burn nitroglycerin in our engine. Great power to weight ratio but with practical problems. There is a controlcircuit built in to lithium battery packs that monitors the voltage andthe cell temperature. It is there for a very good reason - Toreduce the likelihood of a cell being overcharged or overheated and thusstarting to burn. It's not an automatic thing. I've dissected the little 'pillow' batteries used in my grand-children's helicopters and found tiny etched circuit boards of unknown quality or performance . . . but yes, there was some form of electronic 'smarts'. At the same time, there are manufacturers of all manner of lithium products who may or may not include such features . . . perhaps expecting the system integrator to add the necessary electronics. The TrueBlue certified batteries are huge arrays of cylindrical cells . . . manufactured by A123 if memory serves. I'm pretty sure these cells are raw chemistry with no 'smarts'. I'll dissect some 18650 cells I have on hand one of these days and see what's inside them . . . at MOST it will be a fuse or other current limiting device. there is NO protection for over discharge or over charge. I'm pretty sure there's no 'smarts' in an AeroVolts product and there have been a few 'melt downs' that behaved more like burning enclosures than of a lithium fed fire. The word 'lithium' is only a imperative to inquire deeper into how it is compounded and implemented from the system perspective. Further, 'news' stories about exploding batteries have little if any relevance to our deliberations. Yeah, lithium has some risks as does gasoline or even lead-acid. The trick is to reduce those risks in a manner that would make Walter Beech or Duane Wallace proud. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 03:41:47 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Lithium Battery destroys a NASA robot At 01:59 PM 10/28/2016, you wrote: > > >The headline distorts the facts. Yes, lithium batteries will >cumbust if they aren't handled properly and carefully. So too will >dynamite explode if not handled carefully. Gasoline vapors will >burn if an ignition source is provided. Lead/acid batteries will explode. Agreed. I've often suggested that the step up from lead-acid to lithium was akin to figuring out how to burn nitroglycerin in our engine. Great power to weight ratio but with practical problems. >There is a control circuit built in to lithium battery packs that >monitors the voltage and the cell temperature. It is there for a >very good reason - To reduce the likelihood of a cell being >overcharged or overheated and thus starting to burn. It's not an automatic thing. I've dissected the little 'pillow' batteries used in my grand-children's helicopters and found tiny etched circuit boards of unknown quality or performance . . . but yes, there was some form of electronic 'smarts'. At the same time, there are manufacturers of all manner of lithium products who may or may not include such features . . . perhaps expecting the system integrator to add the necessary electronics. The TrueBlue certified batteries are huge arrays of cylindrical cells . . . manufactured by A123 if memory serves. I'm pretty sure these cells are raw chemistry with no 'smarts'. I'll dissect some 18650 cells I have on hand one of these days and see what's inside them . . . at MOST it will be a fuse or other current limiting device. there is NO protection for over discharge or over charge. I'm pretty sure there's no 'smarts' in an AeroVolts product and there have been a few 'melt downs' that behaved more like burning enclosures than of a lithium fed fire. The word 'lithium' is only a imperative to inquire deeper into how it is compounded and implemented from the system perspective. Further, 'news' stories about exploding batteries have little if any relevance to our deliberations. Yeah, lithium has some risks as does gasoline or even lead-acid. The trick is to reduce those risks in a manner that would make Walter Beech or Duane Wallace proud. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 04:56:21 PM PST US From: William Hunter Subject: AeroElectric-List: What Causes Battery to Go Bad My car battery died after 9 months. In the last 20 years I seem to have very bad luck with batteries in various vehicles. These vehicles are classic cars used rarely (I disconnect the negative terminal when not in use) and some are often used daily drivers (stock cars with stock electric systems). It seems back in the day "maintenance free" batteries seemed to last longer. Is there something different now a days? Bill Hunter ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 07:05:38 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Z16 Rotax 912 problem From: "romaja" user9253 wrote: > Jim, take Bob up on his offer. I am not familiar with a 704 module, unless you are talking about the relay, which is very unlikely to trip the breaker. Since you have a SkyView, can you download the data log and analyze it? MS Excel can search for the maximum voltage. If the voltage really is high, then the crowbar over voltage module is doing its job by tripping the breaker. I can not recommend a filter, usually they do not help much. Search Amazon for "Noise Filter". Many modern avionics can be powered by either 14 or 28 volts, so over voltage is not as big of a concern as it used to be. On the other hand, the Lithium battery does not like over voltage. Do you have high and low voltage alarms set up in the SkyView? Yes I have high voltage and low voltage set on my Skyview. I will check to see where I set them as I cant recall. Thanks Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=461704#461704 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message aeroelectric-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.