Journey with Confidence RV GPS App RV Trip Planner RV LIFE Campground Reviews RV Maintenance Take a Speed Test Free 7 Day Trial ×
 
 


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 08-20-2020, 03:34 PM   #1
Platinum Member
 
IdleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Blairsville Ga
Posts: 174
Default Explosive Li-ion Energy Storage Accident

Hello all not sure if this is redundant however here is some good reading on the potential dangers of Lithium-Ion. The injuries of the four firefighters are testimonial of this event. While of course this is a different application, it exemplifies there is always potential danger with lithium cells. Make sure you read LG, conclusion when they investigated the accident.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise...orage-accident

Stay Safe - Mike
IdleUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 03:48 PM   #2
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 11,542
Default

It is not the same chemistry used in most RV systems, which is much safer.


The bottom line in the story should be that lithium batteries of some chemistries are known to have this potential and should be put into containment systems robust enough to withstand a worst case scenario and have the best of protections systems to try to prevent that worst case.


Similar has been done for years with gasoline, propane, chemical storage that has the potential for similar outcomes.


In this case, if the container held up, which it appeared to in the initial stages anyway, it should also have had a system to prevent the door opening before the issue had been neutralized in the container.


I think there will continue to be discussion of if the lithium batteries are safer or more dangerous in vehicles than gas, diesel, propane, or hydrogen.



I do think this is just one more reason to stick for the safer chemistry in RVs, especially with home built systems.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:06 PM   #3
Platinum Member
 
IdleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Blairsville Ga
Posts: 174
Default

Regretfully you're incorrect there are a number of RV vendors using this chemistry!
IdleUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:12 PM   #4
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IdleUp View Post
Regretfully you're incorrect there are a number of RV vendors using this chemistry!

You could provide specific links to RV vendors using those Nickel Manganese Cobalt (NMC) batteries to prove your point.
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:18 PM   #5
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 11,542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IdleUp View Post
Regretfully you're incorrect there are a number of RV vendors using this chemistry!

You did notice that it was stated as MOST RV systems? I completely stand by it.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:25 PM   #6
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: PHX, AZ
Posts: 2,642
Default

link didn;t open, but if this is the Arizona APS explosion- there were multiple errors
multiple


design, construction, maint. and response



the alleged initial dendrite fault is a real possibility




having had a battery internal short cause a fire- I am taking my time on technology
mike
mkguitar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:41 PM   #7
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

I think Volta systems use NMC cells.

https://voltapowersystems.com/indust...power-systems/

With Idleup starting the topic and often promoting Lithionics and Xantrex on the forum, I'd assume that they don't use NMC cells.
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 04:48 PM   #8
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 11,542
Default

Quote:
Volta energy packs utilize Nickel Manganese Cobalt lithium ion
From the Volta website, as expected.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:14 PM   #9
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

Maybe there's a Xantrex & Lithionics connection that Idleup can tell us about (Neverdie BMS).

xantrex lithionics.JPG

Check the Xantrex lithium / lead acid battery comparison:

xantrex lithium.JPG

Quote:
Usable capacity 30-50%
300-500 cycles
Voltage at 50% SOC 10.5V
Voltage at 25% SOC Dead
78lb 105Ah
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:16 PM   #10
Platinum Member
 
IdleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Blairsville Ga
Posts: 174
Default

The reason I posted this article is because all lithium batteries can be unsafe.

Unlike the folks at Volta which houses their RV Cobalt cells in a steel enclosure for fire protection, (shown below) there are now a number of black market companies selling China batteries (type 31/37) with Cobalt cells unknown to the buyer in plastic cases with cheap MOSFET's which fail to operate properly exposing the battery to failure.

Don't feel to secure with any Lithium-Ion cells regardless of chemistry because they all have a potential for fire. Testimonial of this unless the cells for RV use are mounted in a metal case they will not earn the UL1973 rating for safety. Therefore, 98% of all lithium batteries sold are not safety compliment to be used for RV use! Unless they carry the UL 1973 certification they are not recommended for RV use. This is an important fact since unlike other applications an RV is used to live and sleep in therefore safety is of prime importance.

It's important to note - Most lithium failures are the product low-cost batteries which contain internal flaws and chemical impurities which cause short circuits. Even high end cells have a potential of failure as we all found out when the Note 7 debacle occurred causing a recall of 200,000 Android phones.

Enjoy - Mike

IdleUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:26 PM   #11
Bud
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: LA
Posts: 1,512
Default

"The reason I posted this article is because all lithium batteries can be unsafe."

Virtually every member has know for 'a while' that vaporizers go off in pockets and faces. That testa's catch fire, airliners, and on and on. It is not just b forum members that are aware.


"Unless they carry the UL 1973 certification they are not recommended for RV use."

Because you triple fact checked it? Because the RVIA says so?

bud
Bud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:26 PM   #12
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

I figured this topic was about Volta.

UL 1973 ties in with Lithionics & Xantrex also...

Xantrex's 125Ah battery isn't UL 1973

Quote:
UL1973 Listed*
*125 Ah / 12V & 300 Ah / 12V batteries excluded
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:46 PM   #13
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 11,542
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by markopolo View Post
Maybe there's a Xantrex & Lithionics connection that Idleup can tell us about (Neverdie BMS).

Attachment 9852

Check the Xantrex lithium / lead acid battery comparison:

Attachment 9853

Yep, the same old, highly distorted lead acid comparison that way too many of the lithium sellers use.



If they can't tell the truth in advertising, why would we believe what they say about their batteries, including safety stuff?
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 05:59 PM   #14
Platinum Member
 
IdleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Blairsville Ga
Posts: 174
Default

It's regretful that I put up a thread on lithium safety and I'm attacked for doing so. The article was in place only as a safety precaution to warn RV owners of potential dangers of lithium batteries. I never mentioned any RV lithium vendor in my original post, it only pertained just to the event itself.

Regretfully there are some users who know little to nothing regarding lithium batteries or their chemistry as witnessed by Boosters lack of knowledge that Volta has used Cobalt for years, or Marko's lack if knowledge stating that UL 1973 is owned by Xantrex or Lithionics.

So everyone is aware, UL 1973 classification is a safety standard which must be adhered to for the safe use of lithium cells for use in an RV. Any company can earn this classification providing their equipment meets those safety standards.

As I mentioned previously, 98% of all the lithium batteries and BCM's installed in RV's do not carry the UL 1973 certification for the simple fact they do not meet the required safety requirements since components such as a steel case nor mechanical contacts and numerous other requirements to earn the UL 1973 requirements.

Now you know the true Facts!

Enjoy - Mike
IdleUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 06:06 PM   #15
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IdleUp View Post
............... Marko's lack if knowledge stating that UL 1973 is owned by Xantrex or Lithionics............
You're just making stuff up. I absolutely never stated that.

I did state that Xantrex's 125Ah lithium battery isn't UL 1973 Listed.

Copied from their literature:

Quote:
UL1973 Listed*
*125 Ah / 12V & 300 Ah / 12V batteries excluded
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 06:29 PM   #16
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 11,542
Default

The BS gets deeper. So Idleup gets his shorts in a bunch because I said MOST don't use the dangerous chemistry but did not mention a specific brand that did. In fact I thought that was what they used but didn't bother to confirm it because it didn't seem relevant (and still doesn't) to what I said.


Of course Idleup said earlier that



Quote:
Regretfully you're incorrect there are a number of RV vendors using this chemistry

Without mentioning any names of those vendors, and that was perfectly OK?


I guess he chooses the rules but then they don't apply to him.


I am perfectly fine with what I have said and what others have said.
booster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 06:34 PM   #17
Bud
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: LA
Posts: 1,512
Default

"Regretfully there are some users who know little to nothing regarding lithium batteries or their chemistry as witnessed by Boosters lack of knowledge that Volta has used Cobalt for years, or Marko's lack if knowledge stating that UL 1973 is owned by Xantrex or Lithionics."


Huh? If you are going to make statements like those, you ought to quote folks. But then how could you then make them? To easy for the reader to connect the dots I suppose.

Bud
Bud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 06:57 PM   #18
Site Team
 
avanti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 5,214
Default

Moderators' note:
Please resist the temptation to engage in ad hominem attacks on individual posters. Focus on the facts and stay civil, everybody. If the sniping continues, there will be a major cleanup.
__________________
Now: 2022 Fully-custom buildout (Ford Transit EcoBoost AWD)
Formerly: 2005 Airstream Interstate (Sprinter 2500 T1N)
2014 Great West Vans Legend SE (Sprinter 3500 NCV3 I4)
avanti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 07:02 PM   #19
Platinum Member
 
markopolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: New Brunswick, Canada
Posts: 8,828
Default

If you look through the docs - https://edocket.azcc.gov/Docket/Dock...ail-container2 - related to the fire Idleup posted about you'll find many references to UL1973 ..........

Without digging through them all, I assume that facility met or exceeded UL1973 where applicable.

Using news of a fire in a facility that met or exceeded UL1973 to promote batteries that meet UL1973 as being better is ironic.
markopolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2020, 07:40 PM   #20
Platinum Member
 
IdleUp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Blairsville Ga
Posts: 174
Default

Hopefully this should help clear it up for you guys!

No one owns a UL rating, it is awarded to the manufacture as a stamp of approval their tested RV lithium component(s) all meet UL safety standards.

As an example, in order for an RVís BCM to meet UL 1973 standards, it must employ military grade mechanical silver alloy contacts to meet the rigid UL requirements. These contacts have to withstand 6000 continuous open and close events under full amperage load at the UL laboratory, to meet the minimum UL 1973 requirements.

UL 1973 approval will soon be mandatory by RVIA so all RV manufactures lithium equipment will meet minimum requirements for safety and liability reasons. In fact, this entire month I have been in Zoom meetings with a number of RVIA officials, consultants and a number of battery manufactures regarding RVIA acceptance of a standard for lithium equipment in RVís. Iím presently working with the top five leading RV manufactures regarding lithium integration to their coaches. I will share these installations and information on most all RV forums and other media. So indirectly Iím working for you guys so everyone in the future can enjoy a safe lithium system in their RVís.

Anyhow, as always its been fun, I just planning on putting up the article on the accident to make owners aware for safety reasons, I really didn't have time to explain UL acceptance standards to you guys but we can continue this at another time, but for now I have to run!

Enjoy & Stay Safe - Mike
IdleUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.