Another 787 electrical/smoke incident (on ground)
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Too early for conclusions re: 787 issues.
Not too early to float the idea that far from a design or manufacture issue, this problem could be down to poor judgment with knowledge of pre existing performance issues.
Maybe not.
Not too early to float the idea that far from a design or manufacture issue, this problem could be down to poor judgment with knowledge of pre existing performance issues.
Maybe not.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the outcome of the FAA review deems Lithium-Ion batteries to be too hazardous for transport aircraft applications, then AB may also have a problem. L-Ion batteries are used to power emergency lighting on the A380 and AB also plans to use them on the A350.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Suitcase
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree. This aircraft was the product of the marketing department/spin doctors and not the engineering department. I would not have liked to have been an engineer on this project. The novelty of project meetings beginning with "You promised WHAT???!!" would have worn off very quickly!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denmark
Age: 79
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found a comprenhensive and interesting report made by the American Fire Protection Research Foundation regarding "Lithium-Ion Batteries Hazard and Use Assessment" - info about failures/fires starts on page 47.
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf...rieshazard.pdf
http://www.nfpa.org/assets/files/pdf...rieshazard.pdf
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats wrong with an LI battery getting on fire? Just ditch in the ocean. Sully can help with the SOP. The thing is supposed to be very strong so it will hold together. Its made of plastic so it will float. The Aft E & E access door is bound to leak a little and put the fire out. If they can keep the aux going the pax can keep warm and watch their entertainment while they wait for rescue.
grebllaw123d
Thanks for that link. Would be interesting to know whether this battery fire/explosion occurred under load, or under recharge. The details of when it took place, and the circumstances, are sketchy.
To this non-engineer, various questions arise. Was the APU running; and – if so – for how long, and had it started at the first attempt? Had there been any previous problems with the APU? Did the cleaners have to call for the mechanics, or were they already on board? Were the mechanics present to advise the firemen?
As for the system itself, does anyone know for certain if the APU battery is recharged from the aircraft’s main electrical system (effectively), or is there some kind of autonomous charging circuit? Is there enough space on that rack for a different kind of battery (e.g., NiCad) that would be man enough to replace this Li-ion one? And would the recharging system have to be changed?
Thanks for that link. Would be interesting to know whether this battery fire/explosion occurred under load, or under recharge. The details of when it took place, and the circumstances, are sketchy.
To this non-engineer, various questions arise. Was the APU running; and – if so – for how long, and had it started at the first attempt? Had there been any previous problems with the APU? Did the cleaners have to call for the mechanics, or were they already on board? Were the mechanics present to advise the firemen?
As for the system itself, does anyone know for certain if the APU battery is recharged from the aircraft’s main electrical system (effectively), or is there some kind of autonomous charging circuit? Is there enough space on that rack for a different kind of battery (e.g., NiCad) that would be man enough to replace this Li-ion one? And would the recharging system have to be changed?
Thanks TWT,
Sounds perfect. Obviously no cause for concern then... This seems to back up much of what EEngr has been saying on the other thread.
Sounds perfect. Obviously no cause for concern then... This seems to back up much of what EEngr has been saying on the other thread.
Last edited by Chris Scott; 12th Jan 2013 at 09:52. Reason: Link added
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: toofaraway
Posts: 224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back then ...
“Thales is determined to create the safest, most advanced, efficient and reliable power system possible for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner.
We are partnering with GS Yuasa because we are delighted with their battery technology. Since it is maintenance-free and has longer
service life comparing to current nickel-cadmium batteries, it makes for lower operating costs and increased safety for airline companies”
A no-brainer
We are partnering with GS Yuasa because we are delighted with their battery technology. Since it is maintenance-free and has longer
service life comparing to current nickel-cadmium batteries, it makes for lower operating costs and increased safety for airline companies”
A no-brainer
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: South Korea
Age: 62
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the Yuasa Data Sheet they say
"Inappropiate handling or application of the cells can result in reduced cell life and peformance, electrolyte leakage, high cell tempertures, and even the posibility of smoke generation and fire."
By the way they say "and even the posibility of smoke generation and fire." it seems like they mean fire is very unlikely so I concur, there is nothing much to worry about.
http://www.s399157097.onlinehome.us/...s/LVP10-65.pdf
"Inappropiate handling or application of the cells can result in reduced cell life and peformance, electrolyte leakage, high cell tempertures, and even the posibility of smoke generation and fire."
By the way they say "and even the posibility of smoke generation and fire." it seems like they mean fire is very unlikely so I concur, there is nothing much to worry about.
http://www.s399157097.onlinehome.us/...s/LVP10-65.pdf
Last edited by Cool Guys; 12th Jan 2013 at 10:36. Reason: Spelling
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Ireland
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for that link. Would be interesting to know whether this battery fire/explosion occurred under load, or under recharge.
From my reading of the report that greblaw posted, apart from mechanical or thermal damage the most likely risks of thermal runaway are due to either overcharging or attempting to charge a 'dead flat' battery. My understanding of Li-ion battery caused fires, is that they have started under the latter circumstances where aircraft with discharged batteries have been standing idle for some time with the batteries off-line and a GPU has then been applied to the 'flat' battery.
I can't see an 'almost new' 787 having any of its batteries in a discharged state even if it has been stood in a hangar for a few days. This has to be something else.
Guess we'll need to wait and see.
I wonder if this is the battery type in question. If so, it’s presumably based on the larger cell, the LVP65. (They might have used the smaller LVP10 elsewhere?) The data sheet shows that each cell is rated at 65Ah, with a nominal voltage of 3.7V. Can someone confirm that the low-power DC electrics are the standard 28V DC, implying a 24V battery? If so, would they need a battery pack consisting of 6, 7 or 8 of these cells, connected in series? Each cell is 2” thick, and weighs just over 6lb.
Interesting that they went for Li-ion cells that use “Lithium Cobalt Oxide cathode material”, providing “the best combination of high reliability [sic], high energy storage, and long life”. Knowing nothing about this, I wonder if anyone might comment on this extract from a website giving consumer advice on batteries, dating from 2011:
“There are two basic types of lithium-ion chemistries: cobalt and manganese (spinel). To achieve maximum runtime, cell phones, digital cameras and laptops use cobalt-based lithium-ion. Manganese is the newer of the two chemistries and offers superior thermal stability. It can sustain temperatures of up to 250°C (482°F) before becoming unstable. In addition, manganese has avery low internal resistance and can deliver high current on demand. Increasingly, these batteries are used for power tools and medical devices. Hybrid and electric vehicles will be next.
“The drawback of spinel is lower energy density. Typically, a cell made of a pure manganese cathode provides only about half the capacity of cobalt.”
Interesting that they went for Li-ion cells that use “Lithium Cobalt Oxide cathode material”, providing “the best combination of high reliability [sic], high energy storage, and long life”. Knowing nothing about this, I wonder if anyone might comment on this extract from a website giving consumer advice on batteries, dating from 2011:
“There are two basic types of lithium-ion chemistries: cobalt and manganese (spinel). To achieve maximum runtime, cell phones, digital cameras and laptops use cobalt-based lithium-ion. Manganese is the newer of the two chemistries and offers superior thermal stability. It can sustain temperatures of up to 250°C (482°F) before becoming unstable. In addition, manganese has avery low internal resistance and can deliver high current on demand. Increasingly, these batteries are used for power tools and medical devices. Hybrid and electric vehicles will be next.
“The drawback of spinel is lower energy density. Typically, a cell made of a pure manganese cathode provides only about half the capacity of cobalt.”
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Clemente, CA
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787 Troubles
The horrific onboard fire and the subsequent tragic crash of the UPS 744F flight in DXB was suspected to have been caused by a shipment of inactive container of Li-Ion batteries.
Most flight crews have watched in shock and awe the video of a burning laptop and its multiple re-ignitions onboard a training device during yearly emergency training syllabus.
No one has yet discovered an easy way to pull off the road and jump off a burning aircraft over the Pacific Ocean, cruising at FL410!
Although sophisticated battery technology and extreme electronics are not my area of expertise, I too was concerned when I learned the use of such dangerous power supplies or ideas such as liquid cooling of hi voltage cables in the Dreamliner or any other "330 ETOPS" aircraft with composite structure.
Most of us who grew old with Boeings and other jetliner manufacturers have experienced and understand "growing pains." But so far, 787 adolescent has been more of a nightmare than pleasant dreams!
Perhaps I should ask those gentlemen at the board room in Chicago; how is that outsourcing thing working out for you now?
Most flight crews have watched in shock and awe the video of a burning laptop and its multiple re-ignitions onboard a training device during yearly emergency training syllabus.
No one has yet discovered an easy way to pull off the road and jump off a burning aircraft over the Pacific Ocean, cruising at FL410!
Although sophisticated battery technology and extreme electronics are not my area of expertise, I too was concerned when I learned the use of such dangerous power supplies or ideas such as liquid cooling of hi voltage cables in the Dreamliner or any other "330 ETOPS" aircraft with composite structure.
Most of us who grew old with Boeings and other jetliner manufacturers have experienced and understand "growing pains." But so far, 787 adolescent has been more of a nightmare than pleasant dreams!
Perhaps I should ask those gentlemen at the board room in Chicago; how is that outsourcing thing working out for you now?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow...
I"m not a fan of the 787...but it is being beaten up way to much for what has actually happened.
the following could happen to any plane (transport ;jet)
battery fire (yes in my lifetime I've heard about nicad fires and YES I THINK LITHIUM ION is a bit too new for airplanes)...and this could have been due to someone shoving a golf club through the battery area by accident or something else.
FUEL LEAK...well, it really wasn't a fuel leak, it was a fuel spill out the surge tank vent...
Windshield crack...outer pane of a 5 pane windshield...I've seen it happen on 2 different jets that I've flown.
Brake problems...oh come on
oil leak from engine...yes it happens.
and there were delays, probably due to massive subcontracting all over the world.
yes, teething problems...yes it will get better...but come on.
oh, and to the guy who mentioned the 12FPS impact of the DC980...well, planes can handle a dead drop from 6 feet, and 600 FPM (hey boys and girls that is less than 12 FPS) is about a max landing without damage
sure, we learn things...improvements are made...and real pilots know not to fly the "A" model of anything.
I"m not a fan of the 787...but it is being beaten up way to much for what has actually happened.
the following could happen to any plane (transport ;jet)
battery fire (yes in my lifetime I've heard about nicad fires and YES I THINK LITHIUM ION is a bit too new for airplanes)...and this could have been due to someone shoving a golf club through the battery area by accident or something else.
FUEL LEAK...well, it really wasn't a fuel leak, it was a fuel spill out the surge tank vent...
Windshield crack...outer pane of a 5 pane windshield...I've seen it happen on 2 different jets that I've flown.
Brake problems...oh come on
oil leak from engine...yes it happens.
and there were delays, probably due to massive subcontracting all over the world.
yes, teething problems...yes it will get better...but come on.
oh, and to the guy who mentioned the 12FPS impact of the DC980...well, planes can handle a dead drop from 6 feet, and 600 FPM (hey boys and girls that is less than 12 FPS) is about a max landing without damage
sure, we learn things...improvements are made...and real pilots know not to fly the "A" model of anything.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh, and to the guy who mentioned the 12FPS impact of the DC980...well, planes can handle a dead drop from 6 feet, and 600 FPM (hey boys and girls that is less than 12 FPS) is about a max landing without damage
See it here:
Last edited by repariit; 12th Jan 2013 at 23:40.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Grassy Valley
Posts: 2,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the face of it, outsourcing is not the issue. If a vendor is offshore and delivers his ready to install unit to final assembly, (batteries), it takes a leap to finger system interface as the issue. Place, position, and secure, then it gets wired......
This is an ops issue, imo. Boeing can't be present for line service, and thats on the Mx, or contractor. If its procedural, again, Boeing can't bird dog best practice on the line.
Windshield? Install issue. Almost certainly. Sloshing fuel dumped on the tarmac?
The tank was overfilled....Brakes? That died a quick death, no fallout.
I have no idea what FAA is up to. "Review" can mean anything from flipping through the logs to swarming the engineering with a microscope.
This entire thing could be overblown. The first fire was a tramp tool left in the EE bay, the second a fried generator, and now perhaps poor procedures on the ground.....
The arrow spins, was it Boeing for pushing too hard for Lithium, or the FAA for signing it off whilst blindfolded? They wrote it, should they eat it?
One thing is certain, somebody got chewed out for releasing the picture.
This is an ops issue, imo. Boeing can't be present for line service, and thats on the Mx, or contractor. If its procedural, again, Boeing can't bird dog best practice on the line.
Windshield? Install issue. Almost certainly. Sloshing fuel dumped on the tarmac?
The tank was overfilled....Brakes? That died a quick death, no fallout.
I have no idea what FAA is up to. "Review" can mean anything from flipping through the logs to swarming the engineering with a microscope.
This entire thing could be overblown. The first fire was a tramp tool left in the EE bay, the second a fried generator, and now perhaps poor procedures on the ground.....
The arrow spins, was it Boeing for pushing too hard for Lithium, or the FAA for signing it off whilst blindfolded? They wrote it, should they eat it?
One thing is certain, somebody got chewed out for releasing the picture.
Last edited by Lyman; 13th Jan 2013 at 01:04.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I picked up the guy standing on that desert landing at Palmdale in the DC9 80 in a citation jet. He left the shoe for his broken foot in the airplane so delivered it to him the next day. The FAA guy was doing the landing and exceeded the required sink rate at touchdown. The Aloha 737 that blew it's top off came from our airline and I had hundreds of hours In it. You can see our paint job by the ripped off skin. The 787 will be fine once they work out a few problems. Most new models go through a growing process.