787 electrical fires, they keep cropping up.

[LTC8K6]

The new Airbus A350 will have 4 similar lithium ion batteries aboard, all in the forward electronics bay, so Airbus is anxiously awaiting developments with the 787 battery problems...

 

[Hugo Drax]

NTSB reported today on the issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/b...lengthy-inquiry-into-787-dreamliner.html?_r=0

Looks like it could be a prolonged grounding.

Deborah A.P. Hersman, chairwoman of the board, said a battery that caught fire in a 787 parked at a gate at Logan Airport in Boston showed signs of short-circuiting and of a “thermal runaway,” in which a chemical reaction begins to overheat the battery and speeds up as the temperature increases. But Ms. Hersman described these as “symptoms,” and pointedly declined to say whether those problems were the cause of the incident, which, combined with a similar event in Japan, has led to the grounding of all 50 of the planes in service.

“These are all symptoms that something’s wrong,” she said. “Understanding what came first and what triggered the next thing, that’s information we are working to identify.”

While there were no deaths or injuries, she said, “These events should not happen.”

“There are multiple systems to prevent against a battery event like this,” she said. “Those systems did not work as intended. We need to understand why.”

 

[Number1]

NTSB: 787 probe far from complete

Like I said before:

"This is an unprecedented event. We are very concerned. We do not expect to see fire events on board aircraft. This is a very serious air safety concern."


The A350 is looking better and better.

 

[Hugo Drax]

I wonder if the short circuit is something happening inside of the cell due to vibrations caused by takeoffs and landings. From what they described it seems like its a pretty high density cell.

 

[Number1]

The new Airbus A350 will have 4 similar lithium ion batteries aboard, all in the forward electronics bay, so Airbus is anxiously awaiting developments with the 787 battery problems...

Will have? The 350 is still in development and will ONLY use those batteries if they are safe, something Boeing should have checked before putting them in airliners.

 

[halik]

Not nearly as big as I thought it was.

thats what she said

 

[LTC8K6]

Will have? The 350 is still in development and will ONLY use those batteries if they are safe, something Boeing should have checked before putting them in airliners.

The batteries were thoroughly tested, of course. They were chosen in ~2005, and were tested thoroughly before being put in the planes. Plus, the 787 had something like 50K flight hours.

Those lithium batteries are far lighter. That's why they are used on many planes. Airbus made the statement about awaiting the Boeing outcome. You have to make decisions well in advance of production, and it often isn't easy to change things, as we have seen with other recent airliner builds.

Airbus is intensely interested in this battery problem.

 

[LTC8K6]

The batteries and chargers involved in the fire and whistleblower complaint at Securaplane are apparently not the ones used in the 787.

"Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel said the 2006 fire resulted from “an improper test set up, not the design of the battery.” FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency “investigated Mr. Leon's complaints in 2008 and 2009. The investigation determined that the battery charging units in the complaints were prototypes, and none are installed in Boeing 787 aircraft. "

"Boeing’s Birtel said the batteries referenced in the correspondence between Securaplane and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration are not “the specific battery type currently under NTSB investigation or subject of the FAA emergency airworthiness directive.”"

http://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tec...ppliers-facility/60809/?oref=nextgov_today_nl

 

[NFS4]

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/elon-musk-boeing-787-battery-fundamentally-unsafe-381627/

Elon Musk: Boeing 787 battery fundamentally unsafe

The lithium ion batteries installed on the Boeing 787 are inherently unsafe, says Elon Musk, founder of SpaceX and owner of electric car maker Tesla.

"Unfortunately, the pack architecture supplied to Boeing is inherently unsafe," writes Musk in an email to Flightglobal.

"Large cells without enough space between them to isolate against the cell-to-cell thermal domino effect means it is simply a matter of time before there are more incidents of this nature," he adds.

Both Boeing and Tesla use batteries fueled by lithium cobalt oxide, which is among the most energy-dense and flammable chemistries of lithium-ion batteries on the market. While Boeing elected to use a battery with a grouping of eight large cells, Tesla's batteries contain thousands of smaller cells that are independently separated to prevent fire in a single cell from harming the surrounding ones.

"Moreover, when thermal runaway occurs with a big cell, a proportionately larger amount of energy is released and it is very difficult to prevent that energy from then heating up the neighboring cells and causing a domino effect that results in the entire pack catching fire," says Musk.

An aerospace-capable version of Tesla's battery has been developed for use in SpaceX's Falcon 9 space launch vehicle. SpaceX, also owned by Musk, competes with Boeing/Lockheed Martin joint venture United Launch Alliance for customers. Boeing has thus far declined offers of assistance from Tesla and SpaceX, says Musk.

"They [Boeing] believe they have this under control, although I think there is a fundamental safety issue with the architecture of a pack with large cells," writes Musk in an email. "It is much harder to maintain an even temperature in a large cell, as the distance from the center of the cell to the edge is much greater, which increases the risk of thermal runaway."

Musk's assessments of battery cells were confirmed by Donald Sadoway, a professor of electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"I would have used the same words," says Sadoway. "I would have used the same words. I'm glad someone with such a big reputation put it on the line."

"He's engineered [Tesla's battery] to prevent the domino effect, while Boeing evidently doesn't have that engineering," adds Sadoway.

As a fleet-wide grounding enters its third week, the battery failures on 787s flown by Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways eariler this month remain under investigation by the US National Transportation Safety Board. Japanese inspectors have cleared the maker of the battery, GS Yuasa, of any defects before the unit leaves the factory. But both Japanese and US investigators continue to examine and test the batteries to understand why they failed after they were integrated into the 787 electrical system and operated on commercial flights.

The NTSB, for example, has began a detailed examination of an undamaged 787 battery at a US Navy laboratory, hoping to "uncover signs of any degradation in expected performance".

Investigators are trying to find the answer to a problem that eluded Boeing and the FAA in the certification phase, even though the manufacturer and the regulator were well aware of the risks posed by lithium-ion batteries.

Mike Sinnett, Boeing's 787 chief project engineer, explained the careful design philosophy employed for the 787's battery system, the first to serve as a starter for an auxiliary power unit and emergency power back-up in a commercial aircraft.

"I design a cell to not fail and then assume it will and the ask the next 'what-if' questions," Sinnett said. "And then I design the batteries that if there is a failure of one cell it won't propagate to another. And then I assume that I am wrong and that it will propagate to antoher and then I design the enclosure and the redundancy of the equipment to assume that all the cells are involved and the airplane needs to be able to play through that."

 

[H54]

Big words from an outsider.

 

[jpeyton]

Big words from an outsider.

Indeed, what the hell does Musk know about Li-ion batteries?

And that EE Prof is a crackpot from some no-name college I've never heard of.

 

[NFS4]

Big words from an outsider.

Da hell? Musk, an outsider in lithium ion batteries? That's like saying Lindsay Lohan is an outsider to crackwhoring.

 

[wirednuts]

I wonder if the short circuit is something happening inside of the cell due to vibrations caused by takeoffs and landings. From what they described it seems like its a pretty high density cell.

no kidding. likely built as soft cells, with too thin of layers LOL. well whatever type of polymer they used, obviously it wasnt applied properly.

 

[wirednuts]

Mike Sinnett, Boeing's 787 chief project engineer, explained the careful design philosophy employed for the 787's battery system, the first to serve as a starter for an auxiliary power unit and emergency power back-up in a commercial aircraft.

"I design a cell to not fail and then assume it will and the ask the next 'what-if' questions," Sinnett said. "And then I design the batteries that if there is a failure of one cell it won't propagate to another. And then I assume that I am wrong and that it will propagate to antoher and then I design the enclosure and the redundancy of the equipment to assume that all the cells are involved and the airplane needs to be able to play through that."

i think maybe he was overlooking the obvious. the smaller the cells, the safer.

 

[NFS4]

Smoking Gun?

Even before two battery failures led to the grounding of all Boeing 787 jets this month, the lithium-ion batteries used on the aircraft had experienced multiple problems that raised questions about their reliability.

Officials at All Nippon Airways, the jets’ biggest operator, said in an interview on Tuesday that it replaced 10 of the batteries in the months before fire in one plane and smoke in another led regulators around the world to ground the jets.

The airline said it told Boeing of the replacements as they occurred but was not required to report them to safety regulators because they were not considered a safety issue and no flights were canceled or delayed.

National Transportation Safety Board officials said Tuesday that their inquiry would include the replacements.

The airline also, for the first time, explained the extent of the previous problems, which underscore the volatile nature of the batteries and add to concerns over whether Boeing and other plane manufacturers will be able to use the batteries safely.

In five of the 10 replacements, All Nippon said that the main battery had showed an unexpectedly low charge. An unexpected drop in a 787’s main battery also occurred on the All Nippon flight that had to make an emergency landing in Japan on Jan. 16.

The airline also revealed that in three instances, the main battery failed to operate normally and had to be replaced along with the charger. In other cases, one battery showed an error reading and another, used to start the auxiliary power unit, failed. All the events occurred from May to December of last year. The main battery on the plane that made the emergency landing was returned to its maker, GS Yuasa, and that 10 other batteries involved in mishaps were sent to the airline’s maintenance department.

Kelly Nantel, a spokeswoman for the National Transportation Safety Board, said investigators had only recently heard that there had been “numerous issues with the use of these batteries” on 787s. She said the board had asked Boeing, All Nippon and other airlines for information about the problems.

“That will absolutely be part of the investigation,” she said.

Boeing, based in Chicago, has said repeatedly that any problems with the batteries can be contained without threatening the planes and their passengers.

But in response to All Nippon’s disclosures, Boeing officials said the airline’s replacement of the batteries also suggested that safeguards were activated to prevent overheating and keep the drained batteries from being recharged.

Boeing officials also acknowledged that the new batteries were not lasting as long as intended. But All Nippon said that the batteries it replaced had not expired.

A GS Yuasa official, Tsutomu Nishijima, said battery exchanges were part of the normal operations of a plane but would not comment further.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/b...of-battery-ills-before-the-fires.html?hp&_r=0

 

[H54]

Da hell? Musk, an outsider in lithium ion batteries? That's like saying Lindsay Lohan is an outsider to crackwhoring.

I think its fair to say that more context and required before he can make a comment like that.

 

[EagleKeeper]

I think its fair to say that more context and required before he can make a comment like that.

Given that the person has designed avionics batteries and that a Professor in EE at MIT backs him up would lend credence to his comments.

He does not have a company that is in competition with Boeing and/or the battery supplier.

 

[H54]

Given that the person has designed avionics batteries and that a Professor in EE at MIT backs him up would lend credence to his comments.

He does not have a company that is in competition with Boeing and/or the battery supplier.

That is true but he does not have intimate knowledge of what is going on at Boeing. I think its irresponsible of him to make such comments without context.

 

[Pantoot]

He does not have a company that is in competition with Boeing and/or the battery supplier.

I am certainly not besmirching the character of Mr Musk, but:

An aerospace-capable version of Tesla's battery has been developed for use in SpaceX's Falcon 9 space launch vehicle. SpaceX, also owned by Musk, competes with Boeing/Lockheed Martin joint venture United Launch Alliance for customers. Boeing has thus far declined offers of assistance from Tesla and SpaceX, says Musk.

It is unlikely that this "assistance" was free.

 

[Hugo Drax]

I see the 787 parked for 6 months minimum so far from all the reports I have read.

 

[BUTCH1]

At this point they would be better off replacing them with lead-acid batteries and be done with it, sure they weigh more but is the weight savings realized by using the current batteries really worth it??.

 

[H54]

At this point they would be better off replacing them with lead-acid batteries and be done with it, sure they weigh more but is the weight savings realized by using the current batteries really worth it??.

Its not as simple as that. When an aircraft is certified by the FAA, it is certified in a certain configuration. This process can take years. Any deviation from that configuration (introducting a subtype or making a change to the original design) means re-certification. I'm guessing that Boeing and the FAA would be able to work out a truncated timeline since this isn't an entirely new type or even a subtype.

 

[EagleKeeper]

An aerospace-capable version of Tesla's battery has been developed for use in SpaceX's Falcon 9 space launch vehicle. SpaceX, also owned by Musk, competes with Boeing/Lockheed Martin joint venture United Launch Alliance for customers. Boeing has thus far declined offers of assistance from Tesla and SpaceX, says Musk.

It is unlikely that this "assistance" was free.

It will cost Boeing more in one days worth of grounding than the cost of the guys services for a week.

There is a clash of ego's going on.

 

[LTC8K6]

Smoking Gun?



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/b...of-battery-ills-before-the-fires.html?hp&_r=0

Not really.

It's only slightly higher than the normal battery replacement rate I think.

I believe that's what Boeing said.

 

[Number1]

Not really.

It's only slightly higher than the normal battery replacement rate I think.

I believe that's what Boeing said.

Boeing did not think the grounding was necessary either.
I find it strange that they don't have a quick solution for this, some other type of safer battery technology to bolt in. Considering the size of the defective units, even if a replacement technology was twice as big and heavy they should be able to find room for it. It's probably not this simple I guess.

It's sad to see such a small part of the plane bringing the whole thing to a complete stop.