[Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes. The European aerospace group said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350 due to the uncertainty surrounding the technology following the grounding of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. The A350 is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year. Airbus says it does not expect the battery switch to delay the A350's schedule. Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, and manufacturers view them as an important way to save on fuel costs. But the batteries are also more likely to short circuit and start a fire than other batteries if they are damaged, if there is a manufacturing flaw or if they are exposed to excessive heat. Federal officials grounded the 787 last month because of problems with its lithium-ion batteries that caused one fire and forced another plane to make an emergency landing. Airbus considers this to be the most appropriate way forward in the interest of program execution and A350 XWB reliability, spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said. Airbus noted the A350 uses batteries in a different setup than the 787, making it unlikely that it would face the same problems. Its A350 flight-test program would still go forward with lithium-ion batteries. But because the causes of the problems with the 787 batteries remain unclear, Airbus decided to make the switch to optimise program certainty, Ms Greczyn said. Airbus is a unit of Netherlands-based EADS NV. The Wall Street Journal first reported on Airbus' decision to drop the lithium-ion batteries, noting the incidents with the 787 have led to industry uncertainty about future safety standards for the technology. Regards Craig Vinall ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
On 25/02/2013, at 8:33 PM, Craig Vinall craig.vin...@bigpond.com wrote: Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? Probably the wrong question to ask, given that you could just as easily inquire into whether there's a potential fire risk inherent in carrying around tanks of volatile hydrocarbons. More useful questions would be, Under what conditions can a fire start, and, Once it has started, what can you do about it? By my money, the worst parts about the event in NY weren't associated with the fact that the batteries caught fire; the worst bits were the fact that Boeing had assured the FAA that thermal runaway was impossible (it clearly wasn't) and the fact that it took fire crews, with all their training and specialized equipment, more than 40 minutes to extinguish it. Could have been worse -- could have been over the Pacific somewhere at the limits of ETOPS. ANA has grounded their 787s until at least May, so there'll be a lot of time to ponder those issues before they start flying again. - mark ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
What's (hopefully) getting popular in gliders now is lithium *iron* (LiFePO4) rather than lithium-ion. That one little r is the difference between a fireball and a sizzle [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_battery#Safety] On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Mark Newton new...@atdot.dotat.org wrote: On 25/02/2013, at 8:33 PM, Craig Vinall craig.vin...@bigpond.com wrote: Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? Probably the wrong question to ask, given that you could just as easily inquire into whether there's a potential fire risk inherent in carrying around tanks of volatile hydrocarbons. More useful questions would be, Under what conditions can a fire start, and, Once it has started, what can you do about it? By my money, the worst parts about the event in NY weren't associated with the fact that the batteries caught fire; the worst bits were the fact that Boeing had assured the FAA that thermal runaway was impossible (it clearly wasn't) and the fact that it took fire crews, with all their training and specialized equipment, more than 40 minutes to extinguish it. Could have been worse -- could have been over the Pacific somewhere at the limits of ETOPS. ANA has grounded their 787s until at least May, so there'll be a lot of time to ponder those issues before they start flying again. - mark ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
However, there isn't much point at the moment The weight saving is small for the same capacity, but the cost difference is huge. As an example, a 10Ah LiFePO4 battery in the standard size most of use weighs 1.92kg. An equivalent 9Ah SLA weighs 2.55kg On 25/02/2013, at 21:33 , Matthew Scutter yellowplant...@gmail.com wrote: What's (hopefully) getting popular in gliders now is lithium *iron* (LiFePO4) rather than lithium-ion. That one little r is the difference between a fireball and a sizzle [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_battery#Safety] On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Mark Newton new...@atdot.dotat.org wrote: On 25/02/2013, at 8:33 PM, Craig Vinall craig.vin...@bigpond.com wrote: Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? Probably the wrong question to ask, given that you could just as easily inquire into whether there's a potential fire risk inherent in carrying around tanks of volatile hydrocarbons. More useful questions would be, Under what conditions can a fire start, and, Once it has started, what can you do about it? By my money, the worst parts about the event in NY weren't associated with the fact that the batteries caught fire; the worst bits were the fact that Boeing had assured the FAA that thermal runaway was impossible (it clearly wasn't) and the fact that it took fire crews, with all their training and specialized equipment, more than 40 minutes to extinguish it. Could have been worse -- could have been over the Pacific somewhere at the limits of ETOPS. ANA has grounded their 787s until at least May, so there'll be a lot of time to ponder those issues before they start flying again. - mark ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
Lfp weight 10ah 1.15kg vs sla 9ah 3.2kg Michael On 25/02/2013, at 9:12 PM, Matthew Gage m...@knightschallenge.com wrote: However, there isn't much point at the moment The weight saving is small for the same capacity, but the cost difference is huge. As an example, a 10Ah LiFePO4 battery in the standard size most of use weighs 1.92kg. An equivalent 9Ah SLA weighs 2.55kg On 25/02/2013, at 21:33 , Matthew Scutter yellowplant...@gmail.com wrote: What's (hopefully) getting popular in gliders now is lithium *iron* (LiFePO4) rather than lithium-ion. That one little r is the difference between a fireball and a sizzle [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_iron_phosphate_battery#Safety] On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Mark Newton new...@atdot.dotat.org wrote: On 25/02/2013, at 8:33 PM, Craig Vinall craig.vin...@bigpond.com wrote: Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? Probably the wrong question to ask, given that you could just as easily inquire into whether there's a potential fire risk inherent in carrying around tanks of volatile hydrocarbons. More useful questions would be, Under what conditions can a fire start, and, Once it has started, what can you do about it? By my money, the worst parts about the event in NY weren't associated with the fact that the batteries caught fire; the worst bits were the fact that Boeing had assured the FAA that thermal runaway was impossible (it clearly wasn't) and the fact that it took fire crews, with all their training and specialized equipment, more than 40 minutes to extinguish it. Could have been worse -- could have been over the Pacific somewhere at the limits of ETOPS. ANA has grounded their 787s until at least May, so there'll be a lot of time to ponder those issues before they start flying again. - mark ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
All battery systems pose a potential fire risk especially if short circuited, this is why it is essential to provide a suitable fuse as close to the battery terminal as possible. Due to their potential to provide high amounts of discharge current Lithium batteries will generate a great deal of heat if shorted and certainly become a major fire or even explosion risk. If a cell or the battery develops an internal short (before the terminals) then no amount protection in the way of external fuses or circuit breakers will be effective. All new battery technology seems to go through this problem, I can well remember major similar issues with Nickel Metal Hydride batteries a couple of decades ago. I believe in the long term Lithium technology especially some of the newer Lithium Phosphate variants will replace the 150 year old lead acid technology completely (much in the same way as LED lighting is rapidly replacing both incandescent and fluorescent lighting). If you consider the huge amount of lithium batteries in use in mobile devices ranging from portable tools through to laptops, phones tablet PC's and now electric cars, and the relatively rare event of fires caused by these devices then I think it puts the situation into better perspective. One of the major differences in battery usage in a commercial airliner as opposed to a glider (apart from the obvious size of the batteries!) is that the airliners systems are designed to charge the batteries in flight. We would generally charge our batteries in the hanger (unless you have solar panels on the fuselage), And as far as I understand the charging process is where a significant amount of the overheating problems have occurred. I think Airbus is being justifiably prudent given the recent incident with the Boeing 787. However I think with pressure from the aviation industry that battery manufacturers will rapidly further develop their manufacturing processes and fine tune the chemistry, and Lithium technology will win out. As far as our own pastime is concerned, I have been evaluating Lithium Phosphate Batteries manufactured by Shorai in Japan. These are marketed as a replacement 12Volt motorcycle battery. I have conducted discharge tests at fixed current rates (generally 2 Amps) using a commercially designed computer based battery testing system, whilst the manufactures stated A/H capacity is somewhat overstated, the ability of the battery to provide a constant voltage throughout the discharge period (12V) is significantly better than that of its lead acid counterpart. Couple this with the reduced weight and expected longer life then this becomes an interesting option as a Glider battery. By the way throughout the testing I have at no stage found any evidence of abnormal heating of the battery. I have personally used the Shorai battery in flight several times, but given the concerns of the aviation industry in general have held off recommending that our club converts its fleet to this technology in the short term.I believe that it will only be a couple of years before this technology full acceptance in the aviation industry. John Parncutt From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Craig Vinall Sent: Monday, 25 February 2013 9:04 PM To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes. The European aerospace group said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350 due to the uncertainty surrounding the technology following the grounding of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. The A350 is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year. Airbus says it does not expect the battery switch to delay the A350's schedule. Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more energy than other types of batteries of an equivalent size, and manufacturers view them as an important way to save on fuel costs. But the batteries are also more likely to short circuit and start a fire than other batteries if they are damaged, if there is a manufacturing flaw or if they are exposed to excessive heat. Federal officials grounded the 787 last month because of problems with its lithium-ion batteries that caused one fire and forced another plane to make an emergency landing. Airbus considers this to be the most appropriate way forward in the interest of program execution and A350 XWB reliability, spokeswoman Mary Anne Greczyn said. Airbus noted the A350 uses batteries in a different setup than the 787, making it
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to uselithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
Hi John, It is obvious that you have gone to some trouble and time to investigate the situation, and to make this post. Your post seems well reasoned. Do any other members of this forum have any constructive criticisms of John's post, or can add to the information that John has supplied? John, thank you for the information. Gary - Original Message - From: John Parncutt To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:30 PM Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to uselithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes All battery systems pose a potential fire risk especially if short circuited, this is why it is essential to provide a suitable fuse as close to the battery terminal as possible. Due to their potential to provide high amounts of discharge current Lithium batteries will generate a great deal of heat if shorted and certainly become a major fire or even explosion risk. If a cell or the battery develops an internal short (before the terminals) then no amount protection in the way of external fuses or circuit breakers will be effective. All new battery technology seems to go through this problem, I can well remember major similar issues with Nickel Metal Hydride batteries a couple of decades ago. I believe in the long term Lithium technology especially some of the newer Lithium Phosphate variants will replace the 150 year old lead acid technology completely (much in the same way as LED lighting is rapidly replacing both incandescent and fluorescent lighting). If you consider the huge amount of lithium batteries in use in mobile devices ranging from portable tools through to laptops, phones tablet PC's and now electric cars, and the relatively rare event of fires caused by these devices then I think it puts the situation into better perspective. One of the major differences in battery usage in a commercial airliner as opposed to a glider (apart from the obvious size of the batteries!) is that the airliners systems are designed to charge the batteries in flight. We would generally charge our batteries in the hanger (unless you have solar panels on the fuselage), And as far as I understand the charging process is where a significant amount of the overheating problems have occurred. I think Airbus is being justifiably prudent given the recent incident with the Boeing 787. However I think with pressure from the aviation industry that battery manufacturers will rapidly further develop their manufacturing processes and fine tune the chemistry, and Lithium technology will win out. As far as our own pastime is concerned, I have been evaluating Lithium Phosphate Batteries manufactured by Shorai in Japan. These are marketed as a replacement 12Volt motorcycle battery. I have conducted discharge tests at fixed current rates (generally 2 Amps) using a commercially designed computer based battery testing system, whilst the manufactures stated A/H capacity is somewhat overstated, the ability of the battery to provide a constant voltage throughout the discharge period (12V) is significantly better than that of its lead acid counterpart. Couple this with the reduced weight and expected longer life then this becomes an interesting option as a Glider battery. By the way throughout the testing I have at no stage found any evidence of abnormal heating of the battery. I have personally used the Shorai battery in flight several times, but given the concerns of the aviation industry in general have held off recommending that our club converts its fleet to this technology in the short term.I believe that it will only be a couple of years before this technology full acceptance in the aviation industry. John Parncutt From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Craig Vinall Sent: Monday, 25 February 2013 9:04 PM To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes. The European aerospace group said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350 due to the uncertainty surrounding the technology following the grounding of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. The A350 is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year. Airbus says it does not expect the battery switch to delay the A350's schedule. Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
It's interesting that billions of consumer devices can use Lithium-xxx batteries safely (maybe one per 100 million catching fire) while Boeing with the 'help' of FAA regulations manages to fry two out of fifty aircraft. The Monster has become very well at running the daily business (almost no more crashes in big, commercial aviation), but completely incapable of even minor innovation. Only my personal, uninformed, subjective, (somewhat outsider) observation. Urs From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Montag, 25. Februar 2013 04:30 To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes All battery systems pose a potential fire risk especially if short circuited, this is why it is essential to provide a suitable fuse as close to the battery terminal as possible. Due to their potential to provide high amounts of discharge current Lithium batteries will generate a great deal of heat if shorted and certainly become a major fire or even explosion risk. If a cell or the battery develops an internal short (before the terminals) then no amount protection in the way of external fuses or circuit breakers will be effective. All new battery technology seems to go through this problem, I can well remember major similar issues with Nickel Metal Hydride batteries a couple of decades ago. I believe in the long term Lithium technology especially some of the newer Lithium Phosphate variants will replace the 150 year old lead acid technology completely (much in the same way as LED lighting is rapidly replacing both incandescent and fluorescent lighting). If you consider the huge amount of lithium batteries in use in mobile devices ranging from portable tools through to laptops, phones tablet PC's and now electric cars, and the relatively rare event of fires caused by these devices then I think it puts the situation into better perspective. One of the major differences in battery usage in a commercial airliner as opposed to a glider (apart from the obvious size of the batteries!) is that the airliners systems are designed to charge the batteries in flight. We would generally charge our batteries in the hanger (unless you have solar panels on the fuselage), And as far as I understand the charging process is where a significant amount of the overheating problems have occurred. I think Airbus is being justifiably prudent given the recent incident with the Boeing 787. However I think with pressure from the aviation industry that battery manufacturers will rapidly further develop their manufacturing processes and fine tune the chemistry, and Lithium technology will win out. As far as our own pastime is concerned, I have been evaluating Lithium Phosphate Batteries manufactured by Shorai in Japan. These are marketed as a replacement 12Volt motorcycle battery. I have conducted discharge tests at fixed current rates (generally 2 Amps) using a commercially designed computer based battery testing system, whilst the manufactures stated A/H capacity is somewhat overstated, the ability of the battery to provide a constant voltage throughout the discharge period (12V) is significantly better than that of its lead acid counterpart. Couple this with the reduced weight and expected longer life then this becomes an interesting option as a Glider battery. By the way throughout the testing I have at no stage found any evidence of abnormal heating of the battery. I have personally used the Shorai battery in flight several times, but given the concerns of the aviation industry in general have held off recommending that our club converts its fleet to this technology in the short term.I believe that it will only be a couple of years before this technology full acceptance in the aviation industry. John Parncutt From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Craig Vinall Sent: Monday, 25 February 2013 9:04 PM To: aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net Subject: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk? AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes. The European aerospace group said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350 due to the uncertainty surrounding the technology following the grounding of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. The A350 is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year. Airbus says it does not expect the battery
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans touse lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
Hello all I think it is important not to confuse Lithium-Ion with Lithium-Iron batteries. (Please note the additional letter) If my information is correct Boeing is using Lithium-Ion batteries in their Dreamliner and until recently Airbus was proposing to do the same in the new A 350. The gliding community is now increasingly turning to Lithium-Iron batteries! These batteries are very different and have proven to be significantly more stable even under extreme temperature conditions and after repeated mechanical impacts or lengthy exposure to vibration. Schleicher is now fitting LiFePo4 batteries on customer request for the reasons outlined in some of the previous postings on this matter. Kind regards to all! Bernard Eckey Ph. 08 84492871 _ From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Urs Rothacher Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2013 2:43 AM To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans touse lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes It's interesting that billions of consumer devices can use Lithium-xxx batteries safely (maybe one per 100 million catching fire) while Boeing with the 'help' of FAA regulations manages to fry two out of fifty aircraft. The Monster has become very well at running the daily business (almost no more crashes in big, commercial aviation), but completely incapable of even minor innovation. Only my personal, uninformed, subjective, (somewhat outsider) observation. Urs From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of John Parncutt Sent: Montag, 25. Februar 2013 04:30 To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes All battery systems pose a potential fire risk especially if short circuited, this is why it is essential to provide a suitable fuse as close to the battery terminal as possible. Due to their potential to provide high amounts of discharge current Lithium batteries will generate a great deal of heat if shorted and certainly become a major fire or even explosion risk. If a cell or the battery develops an internal short (before the terminals) then no amount protection in the way of external fuses or circuit breakers will be effective. All new battery technology seems to go through this problem, I can well remember major similar issues with Nickel Metal Hydride batteries a couple of decades ago. I believe in the long term Lithium technology especially some of the newer Lithium Phosphate variants will replace the 150 year old lead acid technology completely (much in the same way as LED lighting is rapidly replacing both incandescent and fluorescent lighting). If you consider the huge amount of lithium batteries in use in mobile devices ranging from portable tools through to laptops, phones tablet PC's and now electric cars, and the relatively rare event of fires caused by these devices then I think it puts the situation into better perspective. One of the major differences in battery usage in a commercial airliner as opposed to a glider (apart from the obvious size of the batteries!) is that the airliners systems are designed to charge the batteries in flight. We would generally charge our batteries in the hanger (unless you have solar panels on the fuselage), And as far as I understand the charging process is where a significant amount of the overheating problems have occurred. I think Airbus is being justifiably prudent given the recent incident with the Boeing 787. However I think with pressure from the aviation industry that battery manufacturers will rapidly further develop their manufacturing processes and fine tune the chemistry, and Lithium technology will win out. As far as our own pastime is concerned, I have been evaluating Lithium Phosphate Batteries manufactured by Shorai in Japan. These are marketed as a replacement 12Volt motorcycle battery. I have conducted discharge tests at fixed current rates (generally 2 Amps) using a commercially designed computer based battery testing system, whilst the manufactures stated A/H capacity is somewhat overstated, the ability of the battery to provide a constant voltage throughout the discharge period (12V) is significantly better than that of its lead acid counterpart. Couple this with the reduced weight and expected longer life then this becomes an interesting option as a Glider battery. By the way throughout the testing I have at no stage found any evidence of abnormal heating of the battery. I have personally used the Shorai battery in flight several times, but given the concerns of the aviation industry in general have held off recommending that our club converts its fleet to this technology in the short
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
Very Interesting John. Think there was article on new battery technology in Jan 12 in soaring cafe. CASA have a poster (think at some airports) on carriage of Li batteries on RPT a/c and seem to remember you can carry more in cabin than checked in baggage but by the way it is worded I defy anybody to work out what the legal limit is. They make no mention of Lipo safe bags which the model people all seem to have. Ian McPhee On 25 February 2013 22:30, John Parncutt jparn...@bigpond.net.au wrote: All battery systems pose a potential fire risk especially if short circuited, this is why it is essential to provide a suitable fuse as close to the battery terminal as possible. ** ** Due to their potential to provide high amounts of discharge current Lithium batteries will generate a great deal of heat if shorted and certainly become a major fire or even explosion risk. If a cell or the battery develops an internal short (before the terminals) then no amount protection in the way of external fuses or circuit breakers will be effective. ** ** All new battery technology seems to go through this problem, I can well remember major similar issues with Nickel Metal Hydride batteries a couple of decades ago. ** ** I believe in the long term Lithium technology especially some of the newer Lithium Phosphate variants will replace the 150 year old lead acid technology completely (much in the same way as LED lighting is rapidly replacing both incandescent and fluorescent lighting). If you consider the huge amount of lithium batteries in use in mobile devices ranging from portable tools through to laptops, phones tablet PC’s and now electric cars, and the relatively rare event of fires caused by these devices then I think it puts the situation into better perspective.* *** ** ** One of the major differences in battery usage in a commercial airliner as opposed to a glider (apart from the obvious size of the batteries!) is that the airliners systems are designed to charge the batteries in flight. We would generally charge our batteries in the hanger (unless you have solar panels on the fuselage), And as far as I understand the charging process is where a significant amount of the overheating problems have occurred. * *** ** ** I think Airbus is being justifiably prudent given the recent incident with the Boeing 787. However I think with pressure from the aviation industry that battery manufacturers will rapidly further develop their manufacturing processes and fine tune the chemistry, and Lithium technology will win out. ** ** As far as our own pastime is concerned, I have been evaluating Lithium Phosphate Batteries manufactured by Shorai in Japan. These are marketed as a replacement 12Volt motorcycle battery. I have conducted discharge tests at fixed current rates (generally 2 Amps) using a commercially designed computer based battery testing system, whilst the manufactures stated A/H capacity is somewhat overstated, the ability of the battery to provide a constant voltage throughout the discharge period (12V) is significantly better than that of its lead acid counterpart. Couple this with the reduced weight and expected longer life then this becomes an interesting option as a Glider battery. ** ** By the way throughout the testing I have at no stage found any evidence of abnormal heating of the battery. ** ** I have personally used the Shorai battery in flight several times, but given the concerns of the aviation industry in general have held off recommending that our club converts its fleet to this technology in the short term.I believe that it will only be a couple of years before this technology full acceptance in the aviation industry. ** ** ** ** ** ** John Parncutt ** ** *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Craig Vinall *Sent:* Monday, 25 February 2013 9:04 PM *To:* aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net *Subject:* [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes ** ** Thought this may be of interest. I know that these batteries are becoming popular in gliders; what do others think? Is there a potential fire risk?* *** *AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes.* The European aerospace group said Thursday it would revert to conventional nickel-cadmium batteries for the A350 due to the uncertainty surrounding the technology following the grounding of Boeing's 787 Dreamliner. The A350 is a wide-body long-range jet rival to the 787 and is expected to make its first flight around the middle of the year. Airbus says it does not expect the battery switch to delay the A350's schedule. Lithium batteries are lighter and can store more
[Aus-soaring] worth a look at Australian air safety monthly newsletter
Clubs operating L 0-540 B2B etc engines in Pawnees etc may be interested in this article especially if you have had a rebuild in the past 4 or 5 years. http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/airworth/awb/85/014.pdf A LAME friend of mine when he was in Melb would send his IO-540 engines to Brisbane Aero Engines for overhaul - they . would charge more for overhaul but would do extra which he would want for extra reliability. In an overhaul you get what you pay for. Ian McPhee AA ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
[Aus-soaring] LiFePo4
About $87 and notice a new Arcus M was fitted at factory with something similar. This is NOT what B787 is using. Ian M http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22656__ZIPPY_Flightmax_8400mAh_4S2P_30C_LiFePo4_Pack_AUS_Warehouse_.html ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4
Hi Ian From a safety point of view this is much better than what the Boeing dreamliner is using. However, I would never put a battery like that in a glider unless it is securely placed in a much more impact resistant enclosure. Kind regards Bernard _ From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Ian Mc Phee Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2013 2:15 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 About $87 and notice a new Arcus M was fitted at factory with something similar. This is NOT what B787 is using. Ian M http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22656__ZIPPY_Flightmax_8400mAh_4S 2P_30C_LiFePo4_Pack_AUS_Warehouse_.html ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] AIRBUS has abandoned its plans to use lithium-ion batteries for its new A350 airplanes
At 02:13 AM 26/02/2013, you wrote: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary==_NextPart_000_0629_01CE1338.5E239690 Content-Language: de-ch Its interesting that billions of consumer devices can use Lithium-xxx batteries safely (maybe one per 100 million catching fire) while Boeing with the help of FAA regulations manages to fry two out of fifty aircraft The Monster has become very well at running the daily business (almost no more crashes in big, commercial aviation), but completely incapable of even minor innovation. Only my personal, uninformed, subjective, (somewhat outsider) observation Urs Here's some good information: http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm There's lots of other good information there too. There are in fact a fair number of fires in commercial aircraft usually caused by personal electronic devices failing. Of course you never know how the devices or batteries have been treated. I'd worry about dropping on to hard surfaces causing internal damage leading to internal shorts in the cells. This can apply to all battery chemistries of course including sealed lead acid and even vented lead acid batteries like car batteries. I've heard of two crashes, one recent in the Middle east where a 747 freighter went down after a fire in the cargo where there it was known that Li ion batteries were on board. Another South African 747 disappeared over the Indian Ocean about 10 years ago or so and a cargo of lithium batteries was suspected. Check the FAA battery fire database. There are still crashes in large commercial aviation (Air France 447, the Turkish 737 that landed short at Schiphol and others) mostly where the monkeys up front don't seem to be paying attention or channelise their attention so they miss the big picture. It requires basic stick and rudder skills and the ability to think, neither of which feature much in their daily operations. There seems to be a trend, not only in aviation, to de-skill most jobs and substitute procedure which is fine until something goes wrong or is out of the ordinary. A Boeing spokesman recently said they were modifying the battery in the 787 to put it in a titanium box, add a vent system to outside in the event of fire and actually monitor the temperature and voltage of each cell. Yikes! I'd have thought that would have been in the original design. At least the last bit. How did that get past certification? Seems Thales got the overall battery power design, Securaplane(Meggitt) got the supervisory electronics and Yuasa built the battery cells. Securaplane had a fire some years ago that burned down one of their buildings - where they were running failure tests in lithium batteries. H. Note LiFePO4 are lithium ION batteries. Just the chemistry is different. See the link. That chemistry apparently is considerably safer than some others. Note that the Airbus A380 uses lithium batteries and the first A350 will be lithium battery equipped as they want to fly and test first. It would not surprise me to see lithium in production A350s after the present kerfuffle dies down. Should take about 3 months. Now about those electric gliders with all those incendiary grenades packed alongside the spar or in the middle of the fuselage. High discharge current on very high capacity cells. I think LiFePO4 is safe enough to use for avionics and some other functions in gliders but I'd want to monitor each cell voltage at least in operation, use a proper automatic charger with a cell balance feature and remove the battery from the glider when charging (don't use as starter in motorgliders where there is a generator). In short, properly engineer the installation. Don't charge in the hangar or leave unattended. A nice steel box with nothing up against it that can catch fire would be good. Mike ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] worth a look at Australian air safety monthlynewsletter
Common problem with all lycomings due to splash fed lobes and lifters. There is a relatively new option which involves drilling small holes into the heel of the lobes, one feed hole into the centre cam bearing journal and plugging the ends of the camshaft ( they are hollow ) . Some engineers will offer this as an extra. In my opinion well worth doing, in fact have just done my own cam for an IO-360 I am building (experimental). David Wright - Original Message - From: Ian Mc Phee To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 1:35 PM Subject: [Aus-soaring] worth a look at Australian air safety monthlynewsletter Clubs operating L 0-540 B2B etc engines in Pawnees etc may be interested in this article especially if you have had a rebuild in the past 4 or 5 years. http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/airworth/awb/85/014.pdf A LAME friend of mine when he was in Melb would send his IO-540 engines to Brisbane Aero Engines for overhaul - they . would charge more for overhaul but would do extra which he would want for extra reliability. In an overhaul you get what you pay for. Ian McPhee AA -- ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4
Agreed; something like this would be better http://www.shoraipower.com/s.nl/it.A/id.91/.f 14AH - twice that of a normal SLA glider battery - and less than half the weight @ 662g David From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Future Aviation Sent: 26 February 2013 15:02 To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 Hi Ian From a safety point of view this is much better than what the Boeing dreamliner is using. However, I would never put a battery like that in a glider unless it is securely placed in a much more impact resistant enclosure. Kind regards Bernard _ From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Ian Mc Phee Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2013 2:15 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 About $87 and notice a new Arcus M was fitted at factory with something similar. This is NOT what B787 is using. Ian M http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22656__ZIPPY_Flightmax_8400mAh_4S 2P_30C_LiFePo4_Pack_AUS_Warehouse_.html ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4
New to the group so please excuse any ignorance demonstrated but I have been looking at the EVO2 as a battery. It has a balanced charging port which I am led to believe can up to double the life expectancy of the battery. Claimed Pb equivalence is 15 A/H @ 768g. No low voltage and/or high current cutout board installed, but a nearby fuse on some well covered posts should do the trick perhaps? There are a couple of Australian web sites that sell and shipped within Australia. http://www.motospares.com.au/ballistic-8-cell-evo2/ http://www.ballisticparts.com/products/batteries/8cell.php Cheers. Michael. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:37 PM, David Conway dcon...@adelaide.on.netwrote: Agreed; something like this would be better http://www.shoraipower.com/s.nl/it.A/id.91/.f ** ** 14AH – twice that of a normal SLA glider battery – and less than half the weight @ 662g ** ** David ** ** *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Future Aviation *Sent:* 26 February 2013 15:02 *To:* 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 ** ** Hi Ian From a safety point of view this is much better than what the Boeing dreamliner is using. However, I would never put a battery like that in a glider unless it is securely placed in a much more impact resistant enclosure. Kind regards Bernard ** ** -- *From:* aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [ mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.netaus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] *On Behalf Of *Ian Mc Phee *Sent:* Tuesday, 26 February 2013 2:15 PM *To:* Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. *Subject:* [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 About $87 and notice a new Arcus M was fitted at factory with something similar. This is NOT what B787 is using. Ian M http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22656__ZIPPY_Flightmax_8400mAh_4S2P_30C_LiFePo4_Pack_AUS_Warehouse_.html ** ** ** ** ** ** ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4
Hi Michael, Looking at the details you provided for the EVO battery, I suspect these are of similar construction and chemistry to that of the Shorai batteries, they are certainly aimed at the same market. I you look at my most recent post you will see comparison performance graphs. As far as fusing and terminal insulation is concerned, I cannot overemphasise the importance of placing a fuse holder with the shortest possible lead to the positive terminal (Positive is by convention, it can actually be on the negative terminal) and then securely covering both terminals with hard plastic insulation material. From experience a 5 amp fuse is more than sufficient for most glider installations and in our club we are using the automotive blade style of fuse holder. John Parncutt From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Michael Eales Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2013 5:06 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 New to the group so please excuse any ignorance demonstrated but I have been looking at the EVO2 as a battery. It has a balanced charging port which I am led to believe can up to double the life expectancy of the battery. Claimed Pb equivalence is 15 A/H @ 768g. No low voltage and/or high current cutout board installed, but a nearby fuse on some well covered posts should do the trick perhaps? There are a couple of Australian web sites that sell and shipped within Australia. http://www.motospares.com.au/ballistic-8-cell-evo2/ http://www.ballisticparts.com/products/batteries/8cell.php Cheers. Michael. On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 1:37 PM, David Conway dcon...@adelaide.on.net wrote: Agreed; something like this would be better http://www.shoraipower.com/s.nl/it.A/id.91/.f 14AH - twice that of a normal SLA glider battery - and less than half the weight @ 662g David From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Future Aviation Sent: 26 February 2013 15:02 To: 'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.' Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 Hi Ian From a safety point of view this is much better than what the Boeing dreamliner is using. However, I would never put a battery like that in a glider unless it is securely placed in a much more impact resistant enclosure. Kind regards Bernard _ From: aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net [mailto:aus-soaring-boun...@lists.internode.on.net] On Behalf Of Ian Mc Phee Sent: Tuesday, 26 February 2013 2:15 PM To: Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia. Subject: [Aus-soaring] LiFePo4 About $87 and notice a new Arcus M was fitted at factory with something similar. This is NOT what B787 is using. Ian M http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__22656__ZIPPY_Flightmax_8400mAh_4S 2P_30C_LiFePo4_Pack_AUS_Warehouse_.html ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring ___ Aus-soaring mailing list Aus-soaring@lists.internode.on.net To check or change subscription details, visit: http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
