Dreamliner Batteries

[markgoodrich]

Is it simply that the batteries have a narrow charge range? Too much and they leak or smoke or burn? Too little and things shut down? If so, is it "just" a software issue?

 

Or did BMW design the batteries?

[moshe_levy]

There's alot to this and I would look to a more technical report to see what's going on. Reading the NY Times report today on it was quite frustrating as it was technically vague or outright wrong. I'm very curious what the inspectors are going to find. I agree with Boeing that a switch to newer battery tech was mandatory if any serious weight and efficiency savings were to be realized, but I wonder WHAT TYPE of batteries these really are. There are dozens of variations of Lithium Ion batteries.

 

To me, the safest bet (and I'm NOT an engineer so take this with a grain of salt) would be the LiFePO4 type cell. Yes, this is the same type of cell now available for Powersports applications (think Shorai batteries for your motorcycle, for instance - surely you've seen that by now). These are safer, lighter, smaller, and more efficient BY FAR compared to lead acid AND compared to many, if not most, other Li-Ion based cells.

 

I wonder what Dreamliner used. I am waiting for the facts before commenting.

 

-MKL

[moshe_levy]

PS = The POS Exide crap battery in my RT died last month. Just shy of 36 months in use. So pathetic. I replaced it with an Enersys cell from work. It'll be good for a decade now, at least.

 

-MKL

[upflying]

What kind of battery does Boeing use in the 737?

Problem fixed, why reinvent the wheel?

[Roadwolf]

Bob , the newer batteries, as I understand it, save a lot of weight, one of the reasons Boeing went with Lithium Ion.

[moshe_levy]

Precisely. LiFePO4 is about 1/3 the weight of lead. Lasts twice as long. Has a wider operating and storage temp range. Is less toxic to dispose of. And so on, and so forth. Time to abandon the abacus in favor of a calculator, in other words.

 

-MKL

[ESokoloff]

Bob , the newer batteries, as I understand it, save a lot of weight, one of the reasons Boeing went with Lithium Ion.

 

What about space requirements?

Aren't these batteries physically smaller?

If so then replacing them with old school would not be an option.

Best to iron out the kinks & press on.

[TestPilot]

An important requirement for aircraft batteries is excellent low temperature performance. This is where Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries are weak, and I suspect they can't meet military or civil certification requirements.

[philbytx]

Lots of MilSpec Lithium batteries available for -40C to +60C environments. Issue with the 787 appears to be related to rapid charging of depleted batteries. Cessna had similar issues with Lithium Ion batteries in their newest Citations. However, Boeing is the first manufacturer to use banks of them. Airbus new A350 design went the same way as Boeing, using batteries and they will be the gainers here. Similar to Boeing gaining over De Havilland when the Comet became the worlds first jet airliner in service but suffered metal fatigue and had a couple of fatal crashes. Turns out De Havilland just did static testing but not dynamic testing on the fuselage. The Comet was one beautiful aircraft......

 

I congratulate Boeing though.....the 787 is also a beautiful aircraft and a technological marvel. I do so hope that the charging issue is quickly solved.

 

 

[moshe_levy]

LiFePO4 as has been said can be operated down to -40C. They do not, however, like charging below -10C. That's been my experience at work.

 

-MKL

[Bill_Walker]

Apparently these are not LiFePO4 batteries. The issue seems to be that they are lithium ion batteries using a lithium-cobalt oxide cathode, which makes them prone to overheating, and they use a flammable electrolyte.

 

See Dreamliner Batteries Inherently Unsafe at Ars Technica.

 

My brother-in-law, a longtime aircraft mechanic, opined that the issue may be that because of the required government approvals, aviation technology is always a number of years behind consumer technology. Remember when there were reports of laptop batteries catching fire? Are these the same technology?

[moshe_levy]

Correct, Bill. I was speculating that LiFePO4 ***would have been*** a better choice.

 

-MKL

[moshe_levy]

Oh my God, I just read that article. The experts therein agree, LiFePO4 would have been a better choice. But what I found troubling was (QUOTING DIRECT): “The batteries selected for the Dreamliner "were very large scale—65 amp-hour batteries which is very, very large," said Allen. "They are very high power batteries, and they charge them to 90 percent (of capacity) in about 70 minutes. That's a very fast charge for any lithium battery of this size. And that's a problem when there isn't a cooling system incorporated."

 

My God! A bank of 65AH batteries charged in 70 minutes?! With NO cooling? I dunno... They CAN'T be that dumb, can they?

 

-MKL

[Fubar]

What kind of battery does Boeing use in the 737?

Problem fixed, why reinvent the wheel?

Same reason we don't use wooden wheels or beat our clothes on rocks in the river anymore.

[ESokoloff]

 

My God! A bank of 65AH batteries charged in 70 minutes?! With NO cooling? I dunno... They CAN'T be that dumb, can they?

 

-MKL

 

Cooling systems cost weight, space & money.

 

Have to think that many responsible with the design wanted a heat rejection system but were over ruled.

 

Will be interesting to see how this pans out

[Danny caddyshack Noonan]

With NO cooling? I dunno

 

Replace aluminum masses with composites that, oh by the way, suck at thermal conduction.

 

Some reasonable engineer probably provided a risk assessment and, it appears, got ignored or reassigned.

[mickeym3]

I worked for Boeing over 30 years, the last 5 on the 787 before retirement. Trust me, you are speculating wildly and can't appreciate the robust nature of the design, test and certification process that Boeing uses. You'll think I'm sidestepping but because of proprietary information I don't intend to debate any aspects of the issue, just wish everyone understood how new airplanes come about. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone familiar with "how the sausage is made" who wouldn't jump at the chance to fly on the 787.

[moshe_levy]

Mickey-

 

No doubt you're right. Boeing's been a customer of mine for over a decade, and they've always been thorough. When I said "they CAN'T be that dumb," I meant it literally, not sarcastically. There's something else at play here, and we (the public) just don't know what it is yet. Yuasa is a major player here, and their stuff is usually good too. We've got to wait for the facts.

 

-MKL

[ESokoloff]

..... can't appreciate the robust nature of the design.....

 

Not according to it's current performance (pun intended).

It's obvious that changes need to be made.

[Mister Tee]

I'm at a loss as to why they had to make the thing so incredibly electric power hungry.

[moshe_levy]

Because electric is lighter and more efficient than hydraulic.

 

-MKL

[Paul Mihalka]

More on the subject, from BBC news:

 

US and Japanese authorities have begun a joint investigation into GS Yuasa, the Japanese battery maker for Boeing's troubled 787 Dreamliner aircraft.

 

It comes after an All Nippon Airways (ANA) 787 had to make an emergency landing due to a battery malfunction.

 

However, another US regulator said on Sunday the battery did not overcharge in a separate incident involving a Japan Airlines (JAL)-operated 787.

 

Regulators have grounded all Dreamliners currently in operation.

 

ANA has announced 335 Dreamliner flight cancellations including up until next Sunday. This is set to affect 48,000 passengers, including almost 4,000 international passengers.

Widening probe

 

Yasuo Ishii, a Japanese transport ministry safety official, said: "Engineers from the [uS Federal Aviation Administration], Boeing and our aviation bureau started a probe this morning that is mainly focusing on GS Yuasa's production line.

 

"They are checking on whether there have been any issues in the production process. We still don't know what caused the battery problem, and so we are looking into all possibilities."

 

Japanese battery maker GS Yuasa has seen its shares fall 11% since 7 January when an electrical fire broke out on a JAL 787 at Logan International Airport in Boston, although they rebounded 1% on Monday as it became apparent the fault may not have been a pure battery problem.

 

Investigating that incident, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said the battery did not overcharge.

 

"Examination of the flight recorder data from the JAL B-787 airplane indicates that the [auxiliary power unit] battery did not exceed its designed voltage of 32 volts," the NTSB said in a statement on Sunday.

 

It said it would now widen its probe to look at the battery charger and the auxiliary power unit.

 

GS Yuasa also produces batteries for motorbikes, industrial equipment and power supply devices.

Smoke damage

 

Last week, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said both batteries had leaked electrolyte fluid, and there had been smoke damage to parts of the aircraft.

 

The NTSB said a group of experts would meet in Arizona this week, where the battery charger is manufactured by Securaplane Technologies, to test and examine the part.

 

The battery charger maker, a unit of Britain's Meggitt, said it would fully support the US investigation. United Technologies, which builds the aircraft's auxiliary power unit, said it would also cooperate.

 

On Friday, Boeing said it would put deliveries of the 787 on hold until the FAA approved its plan to ensure the safety of the batteries.

 

It said it would, however, continue building the light-weight fuel-efficient plane.

 

Japan is the biggest buyer of the aircraft, with ANA and JAL operating 24 of the 50 Dreamliners currently in operation.

 

Boeing has orders for more than 800 Dreamliners.

 

[moshe_levy]

(This is why you never see small, niche makers of aircraft. Got to have multiple product lines should one develop glitches like this. Boeing's flush with cash as a result).

 

-MKL

[Fubar]

Latest report on the BBC website is that the problems is not with the batteries themselves. There goes the quick fix, now they have to look through the entire electrical system, a time-consuming and expensive process that can't be laid at someone else's doorstep.

[Oldironken]

i heard it was a trickle charger problem, they didn't spend the extra to get one to match the battery chemistry and used one from a '96 RT instead

[moshe_levy]

Latest report on the BBC website is that the problems is not with the batteries themselves. There goes the quick fix, now they have to look through the entire electrical system, a time-consuming and expensive process that can't be laid at someone else's doorstep.

 

Doesn't matter. The damage is done. The PR against the batteries is a nightmare, and as one who deals in the industry and now gets calls from freaked out customers, I can tell you the domino effect is very real. This likely set the industry back about 2-3 years as the non-technical PR types clamp down on R&D and pushing the envelope to make things lighter, smaller, and more efficient. Now they'll be saddled with ancient, old, heavy cells until the FAA tests everything up, down, and sideways. Then we'll be right back where we started.

 

-MKL

[Roadwolf]

Heard this the other day, good for a chuckle...

 

"Scientists have to explain why the Lithium-Ion batteries in the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner are a source of concern, but the one in my mobile phone in my pocket, inches from my testicles, are not."

 

- Bill Maher

[Downs]

The one in your pocket is dangerous. Kind of. They have lots of safety features built in but lithium batteries popping off release a lot of really bad and toxic stuff which I do not want to be around.

[Fubar]

"Scientists have to explain why the Lithium-Ion batteries in the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner are a source of concern, but the one in my mobile phone in my pocket, inches from my testicles, are not."

- Bill Maher

The one in your pocket is dangerous. Lithium batteries popping off release a lot of really bad and toxic stuff which I do not want to be around.

Yet another reason NOT to put your cell in your pocket.