# Li-ion safety: flashlights vs. laptops



## xeroid (Jan 6, 2015)

My question concerns the safety of batteries. Lion or the 18650's found in laptops, and used in some LED flashlights are designed with an air escape vent under the positive terminal, a safety feature. Yet when you install one or more of these into a flashlight, you have essentially sealed it, and removed it's only safety feature. Can this be a problem, is this a problem that flashlight designers have addressed? I also note that the battery packs in a laptop are also sealed with no way for air to escape, however, there is monitoring circuits involved that measure the voltage and temperature of each cell, and will kill it when or if it finds something out of the ordinary. Is this true in flashlights as well? Or are these flashlights using lithium ion batteries rather potentially dangerous?

On a side note: Is there a way to identify the cells inside a laptop. To know exactly what the cell is? Maybe a chart with identifying numbers?


----------



## magellan (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Great questions, xeroid, and there are numerous threads where these issues have been discussed. I'm still new here myself, but I would do a search and I'm sure you'll turn up some threads for further reading. And I'm sure some of the other more expert folks than I will respond too.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

That is a problem with most flashlights. The pressure from a venting cell can be rather high and blow the flashlight apart.
Protected batteries contains a safety circuit, usual at the bottom of the battery: http://www.lygte-info.dk/info/battery protection UK.html
The battery pack in a laptop is only thin plastic and will easily blow apart if a cell vents.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Common sense should tell you,to save a penny or two you should not be trying to operate an item with a battery not intended to power a torch and buy the appropriate battery for a torch.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

My guess is that in a laptop battery case, the extensive electronic safety circuits that monitor each and every cell individually make laptop battery packs much safer than flashlights and much less likely to pose any explosion or fire. Almost impossible to be considered hazardous. But flashlights, unless of course they contain the same extensive electronic safety circuitry could be considered hazardous. Is anyone aware of any flashlights that have this extensive protection circuitry?


----------



## reppans (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

One of the keys in making consumer Li-ion electronics (smartphones, laptops, cameras, etc) safe, is complete integration of device, battery, and charger with monitoring and control circuitry. With flashlights we can mix, match, and use, the three inappropriately. Although I don't own any yet, I think Foursevens Maelstrom Regens are offering that type of idiot-proof integration - you cannot charge regular Li-ions in them (although certain models can use them). 

As far as the airtight pipe bomb risk, if you stick with single cell formats, you eliminate the reverse charge risk and all but confine the vent-with-flame-risk to the charge cycle, when the battery is out of the tube.


----------



## onetrickpony (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> Common sense should tell you,to save a penny or two you should not be trying to operate an item with a battery not intended to power a torch and buy the appropriate battery for a torch.



Lithium ion batteries were not originally designed with flashlights in mind. They were adopted from other uses due to their capacity, light weight, and convenient voltage, among other things. If you mean to use protected cells or something like that, fine. There are plenty of cells designed for purposes other than flashlights that are perfectly suitable, while there are also plenty of cells marketed for flashlight use that are not up to the task and can be dangerous.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 7, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Well, I went looking and couldn't find any idiot proof flashlight. None (_that I could find_) seem to have the same safety considerations you would find in any laptop running on Lithium Ion and expect to find in any product using Lithium Ion. Most in fact seem to have no safety consideration whatsoever. And Lithium Ion battery manufacturers webpages warn and are very specific telling you to never use these types of batteries without all the safety circuitry almost making it mandatory. The only exception is the use of Lithium Ion that contain their own tiny protection circuit found underneath the negative end of the battery for low draw, low use very limited applications. These "protected" batteries are limited to what it can protect against.

Frankly this is kind of shocking and it wouldn't surprise me to see government safety regulations being forced onto flashlight manufacturers using these types of cells, just as it is today on all other products using them. Some serious accidents have occurred through no fault of the consumer using off the shelf "unprotected" flashlights.

I'm all for safety first, so if anyone knows of a LED flashlight manufacturer that is incorporating safety first, please let me know.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 8, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Well, I went looking and couldn't find any idiot proof flashlight. None (_that I could find_) seem to have the same safety considerations you would find in any laptop running on Lithium Ion and expect to find in any product using Lithium Ion.



A laptop (or phone) has a computer that can be programmed to check the battery. It would be more fair to compare to tools with LiIon batteries, then the difference will be considerable less.
With your requirements for protection you will have to look for lights with proprietary batteries (They exists), most light uses the more common protected LiIon battery.


----------



## reppans (Jan 8, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> ...With your requirements for protection you will have to look for lights with proprietary batteries (They exists), most light uses the more common protected LiIon battery.



+1.... and I mentioned a couple in post #6


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 8, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



onetrickpony said:


> Lithium ion batteries were not originally designed with flashlights in mind. They were adopted from other uses due to their capacity, light weight, and convenient voltage, among other things. If you mean to use protected cells or something like that, fine. There are plenty of cells designed for purposes other than flashlights that are perfectly suitable, while there are also plenty of cells marketed for flashlight use that are not up to the task and can be dangerous.



I do not care less whether they were designed for flash lights or not and I have no idea why you are telling me,in the interests of common sense I would not be using some old tatty battery when I can buy an 18650 which is fit for purpose from a reputable vendor with a proper warranty.

I would love to see an insurance loss adjuster working out a claim for a faulty non working expensive light when you tell him you fuelled it up on non approbate batteries.:devil:


----------



## xeroid (Jan 8, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

I think we are getting off topic, or missing the point. The point being, why aren't LED flashlights being made idiot proof? MORE SAFE

It's not the laptop itself that controls the battery packs. The packs contain their own sophisticated circuits that keep an eye on the pack. A pack can be out of the laptop and still be protected. Same is true in tool battery packs. They need this safety more so because they are contained into closed and sealed space without venting. And with flashlights, batteries are also contained in a closed space not being able to release any gas pressure should the need arise and are not monitored to shut them down in case of failing cell giving rise to the possibility of an explosion. Simply put, these new modern LED flashlights are not safe. One cell can blow a flashlight apart releasing toxic fumes into the air. These monitoring circuits are not that expensive so why isn't safety the first consideration from the manufacturers of the new LED flashlights?


----------



## GunnarGG (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I think we are getting off topic, or missing the point. The point being, why aren't LED flashlights being made idiot proof? MORE SAFE
> 
> It's not the laptop itself that controls the battery packs. The packs contain their own sophisticated circuits that keep an eye on the pack. A pack can be out of the laptop and still be protected. Same is true in tool battery packs. They need this safety more so because they are contained into closed and sealed space without venting. And with flashlights, batteries are also contained in a closed space not being able to release any gas pressure should the need arise and are not monitored to shut them down in case of failing cell giving rise to the possibility of an explosion. Simply put, these new modern LED flashlights are not safe. One cell can blow a flashlight apart releasing toxic fumes into the air. These monitoring circuits are not that expensive so why isn't safety the first consideration from the manufacturers of the new LED flashlights?



There are a lot of safe and very good and bright LED lights - they are powered by NiMh batteries.

If you are an enthusiast or professional needing that extra power that LiIon gives you have some good lights to choose from also.
Singel cell lights that steps down and finally switch off when battery gets weak, for instance Zebralight but also many more.
Many of these also have voltage indicator of some kind.
You don't need protected cells in these lights but many, incl me, use protected cells anyway for extra safety (during discharge and charge).

For multi cell flashlights (I don't have any multi LiIon myself) I would prefer if the cells were in parallell and not in serie.
You don't get inverse charge when connected in parallell.
There are som lights like that, ZL, Fenix, Olight and more I'll guess.

If using a flashlight with 2 or more cells in serie I would only use good quality, protected cells and check voltage before and after use and charge so I know in what health and charge the cells are

Regarding powertools (using the safer IMR chemistry I think) and laptop battery packs they are made with 3 or 6 or maybe more cells and then used and abused in the same configuration for several years.
They are getting drained and charged over and over and maybe put on charge for long time.
As the years passes one or more cells gets bad and without the built in protection you would get inverse charge and problems.

If you want a flashlight that you can treat in the same way my tip is to go with NiMh or buy a light from one of the powertool brands that uses one of their batterypacks


----------



## gravelmonkey (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I think we are getting off topic, or missing the point. The point being, why aren't LED flashlights being made idiot proof? MORE SAFE
> 
> It's not the laptop itself that controls the battery packs. The packs contain their own sophisticated circuits that keep an eye on the pack. A pack can be out of the laptop and still be protected. Same is true in tool battery packs. They need this safety more so because they are contained into closed and sealed space without venting. And with flashlights, batteries are also contained in a closed space not being able to release any gas pressure should the need arise and are not monitored to shut them down in case of failing cell giving rise to the possibility of an explosion. *Simply put, these new modern LED flashlights are not safe.* One cell can blow a flashlight apart releasing toxic fumes into the air. These monitoring circuits are not that expensive so why isn't safety the first consideration from the manufacturers of the new LED flashlights?



I'm assuming you're talking about Li-ion powered lights. Using a single, protected, good quality Li-Cobalt cell (the highest capacity, but most 'dangerous') is safer than driving a car (and, arguably safer than 2*CR123a cells).

Battery packs/propriety batteries are good for the general public, but as a general rule, this is a hobby forum, and most do not want to be tied into purchasing propriety battery packs for each light.

'Modern LED flashlights' also take NiMh and alkaline cells, if you don't want to get into Li-ion complexities..

Edit: Beaten to it by GunnarGG


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I think we are getting off topic, or missing the point. The point being, why aren't LED flashlights being made idiot proof? MORE SAFE


They are safe.

I mean you could argue why are people allowed to sell & petrol (gas) cars, as that is a highly dangerous volatile liquid.

What about cigarette lighters?

Knives & forks are pretty dangerous too.


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Simply put, these new modern LED flashlights are not safe. One cell can blow a flashlight apart releasing toxic fumes into the air.


If you honestly believe that YOU are not responsible enough, then don't buy one. It really is that simple. But please please please never ever sit in the drivers seat of a moving vehicle either.

Trying to change to world by claiming LED torches are dangerous is quite bizarre and not really "NEW and trying to learn".


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Chicken Drumstick said:


> They are safe. I mean you could argue why are people allowed to sell & petrol (gas) cars, as that is a highly dangerous volatile liquid. What about cigarette lighters? Knives & forks are pretty dangerous too.



Not a valid analogy. The general public is well aware of the risks of those everyday devices, but they have no clue about the risk of Li-ion cells because there are no analogous cells in general use. They have no idea about the great power such cells have. This is illustrated quite clearly in the many Amazon reviews of auto jump-start LiPo packs. There you'll find much doubt ("no way this puny battery can jump start my V8") and much surprise ("WOW! I can't believe it worked"). 

Similarly the general public has no clue how much damage Li-ion cells can cause should something go wrong, e.g. the poor vaper who lost half his tongue and chunks of his face due to a faulty e-cigarette.

One cannot casually purchase a cheap Li-ion charger in a dollar store and use it to charge your Li-ion cells overnight. That's a good way to risk burning down your house. But the general public does not know these things because Li-ion safety is not common knowledge. Indeed, such knowledge is quite esoteric - with no close analogy in any other device in general use.

Nor can one mindlessly insert high-current Li-ion cells in a powerbank, since if you get the orientation wrong a dead short can be much more catastrophic than with ubiquitous lower power cells (alkaline, NiMh, etc). Nor can one mindlessly toss spare cells in bags, purses etc due to the risk of "chain shorts", e.g. a necklace could cause a dead short that would not be interrupted by the CID because the current produced may not be high enough to trigger the CID, but still be high enough to cause damage (e.g. the chain serves as a power resistor that heats a neighboring cellphone battery till it explodes). Properly designed battery packs avoid chain shorts by using recessed contacts and/or extra mechanisms required to enable output.

The general public expects consumer-level devices to be foolproof. Loose Li-ion cells are far from foolproof.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

*I've concluded from reading all comments that indeed, Lithium Ion driven flashlights are not idiot proof, and potentially dangerous as it appears they do not use the necessary protection circuits. *

Staying away from Lithium Ion driven lights is certainly a safer option. Single cell lights that steps down and finally switch off when battery gets weak is not the kind of idiot proof safety monitoring you will find in laptop power packs. Your assumption that Lithium Ion Flashlights are safer than driving a car, gas, cigarette lighter, knives and forks are all poor arguments which do not make today's Lithium Ion driven flashlights any safer. 

It's not an argument about if I am responsible enough. The potential is still there no matter how responsible one is, or how much knowledge one has, that an explosion or toxic gas leak could occur and less so if these flashlights would incorporate the same type of extensive protection circuitry you would find in a laptop power pack. But they don't, at least not yet. And there is no reason not to.

So I have learned something, it is much safer today to stay away from poorly designed Lithium Ion driven flashlights that have no venting and do not incorporate extensive safety circuitry.

ADDED INFO FROM OVEREADY.COM

*CAUTIONS:*



*Do not leave unattended while running on high
*
*Do not run primary CR123 on high (100%). The boost driver will drain them harder and harder until the cells overheat, and may explode.*
IMR18350 are recommended minimum. RCR123A / IMR16340 are too small.
This light creates excessive heat
This light may cause eye damage

This light may burn the skin at close range

This light may cause combustibles to ignite

This light is not a toy, keep away from children


----------



## xeroid (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

A more recent product hitting the market are power packs used to charge up cell phones. Take a look at this link: http://www.banggood.com/18650-2600m...lashlight-ca&gclid=CNbcs--mh8MCFQUSMwodyyIATA 

and look at the safety protection circuitry used in a less than $10 product. My argument here would be that it can't cost that much to begin making smarter safer Lithium Ion Flashlights.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

18650 powerbanks have been on the market for many years. You can find some reviews here and on HKJ's site. Even though they have protection circuits (of varying quality) they still are not completely foolproof, e.g. to avoid shorts you need to pay attention to orientation when inserting cells, and you may need to use closely-matched cells, etc.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *I've concluded from reading all comments that indeed, Lithium Ion driven flashlights are not idiot proof, and potentially dangerous as it appears they do not use the necessary protection circuits. *




Some does, other does not and when using protected batteries you do have the protection in the battery anyway.



xeroid said:


> ADDED INFO FROM OVEREADY.COM



These warning are not for a normal flashlight, but for a high power on.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *I've concluded from reading all comments that indeed, Lithium Ion driven flashlights are not idiot proof, and potentially dangerous as it appears they do not use the necessary protection circuits. *
> 
> Staying away from Lithium Ion driven lights is certainly a safer option. Single cell lights that steps down and finally switch off when battery gets weak is not the kind of idiot proof safety monitoring you will find in laptop power packs. Your assumption that Lithium Ion Flashlights are safer than driving a car, gas, cigarette lighter, knives and forks are all poor arguments which do not make today's Lithium Ion driven flashlights any safer.
> 
> ...




While Li-ions are more volatile, doesn't necessarily mean other batteries are idiot proof either. Alkalines (see video) - 

and even NiMH cells are not idiot proof, providing someone puts a fully charged NiMh cell on a high amp charger overcharging it to the point where it bursts. Read up on how to safely use Li-ions and follow those guidelines they will be safer than running with scissors.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Point me to any LED flashlight you believe has these protection circuits built in. Using protected batteries do not encompass all the monitoring required for total protection. They are more designed for the re charging stage monitoring. The warnings are for a 2 cell flashlight (_smaller cells than 18650s_). Many power packs do monitor for shorts. The re charging of batteries and the use of them in flashlights are two different things. This thread is about the safety of using Lithium Ion flashlights, and not about charging batteries. Incorporating extensive protection circuits within a flashlight would not be costly, and therefore there really isn't a good reason why we are not seeing them.


----------



## thedoc007 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Point me to any LED flashlight you believe has these protection circuits built in. Using protected batteries do not encompass all the monitoring required for total protection. They are more designed for the re charging stage monitoring. The warnings are for a 2 cell flashlight (_smaller cells than 18650s_). Many power packs do monitor for shorts. The re charging of batteries and the use of them in flashlights are two different things. This thread is about the safety of using Lithium Ion flashlights, and not about charging batteries.



You have already made it abundantly clear you feel they are unsafe. When you ignore the evidence (thousands of CPF members use lithium-ion every day, with no trouble at all) I don't know what else can be done to convince you. No one is claiming that they are entirely safe, but nothing is...even your vaunted laptops, with all that fancy expensive circuitry, still have had numerous recalls due to fires. The risk is low enough for most, let us leave it at that. Personally I don't feel lithium-ion cells (or lights) are right for everyone, so I would encourage you to just go with other types, and stop beating a dead horse.


----------



## tandem (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> My guess is that in a laptop battery case, the extensive electronic safety circuits that monitor each and every cell individually make laptop battery packs much safer than flashlights and much less likely to pose any explosion or fire. Almost impossible to be considered hazardous. But flashlights, unless of course they contain the same extensive electronic safety circuitry could be considered hazardous. Is anyone aware of any flashlights that have this extensive protection circuitry?



You are making a big assumption about the circuitry in both. 

Protection circuitry has two basic functions: protect against over-charging and protect against over-discharge. Both conditions can damage a cell(s) and leave them in a dangerous state.

The difference between laptops and the individual cells we buy for flashlights has more to do with ownership of the overall solution. A laptop maker like Lenovo or Toshiba owns the entire product, no matter where the component parts are sourced from. They specify products carefully and demand their suppliers meet that specification - there's no sub X for Y this week, H for J next week going on, at least not without notice. Their brand can be substantially damaged if they put dangerous products out into the marketplace. These companies have extensive ties to the supplier networks and know who to buy their component parts from, and who not to purchase from. They own the product design from top to bottom and are putting in your hands something they know should perform to specification.

Even with all this knowledge and scrutiny, sometimes a bad batch of cells sneaks through, and causes issues. Laptops have been implicated in fires world wide - not always due to manufacturing problems of course, sometimes the li-ion fire is entirely due to user action (like blocking ventilation ports and fans, falling asleep with laptop under a pillow or jammed into a couch... running, or partially crushed in an airline seat, or...).

Contrast this to the sale of suspect individually packaged cells and chargers. 

You buy a flashlight -- you are the system integrator now. Do you know enough to select the right products? Do you know what sets lithium ion based lights apart from lights powered by NiMH rechargables? (Hint: one battery technology is intrinsically safe. The other is not.) You need cells and a charger so off the user goes, hunting for either great safe products on-line, or a deal, or following whatever the crowd is shopping for. Hopefully... they are following a good, experienced crowd.

Sometimes the new lithium ion flashlight owner is seduced by price alone and that can lead to the owner unwittingly taking on increased risk. A ton of cheap, badly produced, and far less safe, cells are available for purchase on-line and many are seduced into buying them on price alone. There are unsafe chargers out there being sold and used today. Looking into flashlight-related battery explosion or fire stories you'll find these suspect products implicated in the vast majority of incidents. The makers of these bad cell and charger products don't care. They operate out of a jurisdiction akin to the Wild West and will simply relabel themselves and carry on business if they suffer any adverse effect from a product failure. Most of the time they just ignore such problems, damage, and injury and carry on doing the same thing - sell suspect products. Sadly they have no shortage of buyers.

Be a good systems integrator. Buy known-good cells and known-good chargers. In doing so you'll justifiably be able to use the products with as much assurance as you use your laptop.

Flash lights and li-ion cells being what they are - ultra portable, subject to much more abuse than the average laptop and for that reason I take proportionately more care with my li-ion lights and cells. To this day I still only charge my li-ion cells when I'm around and when I'm awake. Do I take that same precaution with my laptop? Not so much, but I don't go running with my laptop either.


----------



## tandem (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> A more recent product hitting the market are power packs used to charge up cell phones. Take a look at this link: http://www.banggood.com/18650-2600m...lashlight-ca&gclid=CNbcs--mh8MCFQUSMwodyyIATA
> 
> and look at the safety protection circuitry used in a less than $10 product. My argument here would be that it can't cost that much to begin making smarter safer Lithium Ion Flashlights.



What you are looking at is not just a protection circuit but circuitry that also manages charging, supplies (hopefully) a regulated 5V supply to the USB output port. If it does in fact supply 5V output, there's a DC/DC step-up converter within the circuit - this has nothing to do with battery monitoring and regulation.

Is it designed properly? Who knows... many cheap chargers from China weren't in the past. Is this one? Unknown. Buyer beware - There is no certainty that product has integrated within its circuitry a proper Constant Current - Constant Voltage charging algorithm, under and over voltage monitoring and safety features. It's just another nameless product sold under multiple names from the Wild West of China. It may be great. It may be dangerous. It looks a little shoddily built.

It comes with no cells so again the end-user is responsible for purchasing appropriate cells that were produced in a known-good factory, met quality control standards, were stored and shipped properly, etc. 

You really have no clue what you are talking about.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Point me to any LED flashlight you believe has these protection circuits built in.



It is not a question of believing. Armytech flashlights is one of the brands with protection. 




xeroid said:


> Using protected batteries do not encompass all the monitoring required for total protection. They are more designed for the re charging stage monitoring.



Protected batteries has protection for over discharge, over charge and over current. They uses the same protection chip as is used in LiIon battery packs.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I think we are getting off topic, or missing the point. The point being, why aren't LED flashlights being made idiot proof? MORE SAFE
> 
> It's not the laptop itself that controls the battery packs. The packs contain their own sophisticated circuits that keep an eye on the pack. A pack can be out of the laptop and still be protected. Same is true in tool battery packs. They need this safety more so because they are contained into closed and sealed space without venting. And with flashlights, batteries are also contained in a closed space not being able to release any gas pressure should the need arise and are not monitored to shut them down in case of failing cell giving rise to the possibility of an explosion. Simply put, these new modern LED flashlights are not safe. One cell can blow a flashlight apart releasing toxic fumes into the air. These monitoring circuits are not that expensive so why isn't safety the first consideration from the manufacturers of the new LED flashlights?




They are idiot proof,you simply buy an 18650 powered torch select a proper battery pop it in the tube and you have light.Always best to buy protected cells.Anything else pointed out on the instruction sheet you just follow.

To be honest you are making a mountain out of a molehill and you are trying to complicate your own hobby by reading all the bogey men stories.:shakehead


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> Protected batteries has protection for over discharge, over charge and over current. They uses the same protection chip as is used in LiIon battery packs.



That's not true. Most laptop battery packs have much more sophisticated protection compared to "protected cells", e.g. laptop packs have multiple levels of redundant protection. Recent designs may also incorporate heuristics for detecting internal shorts - one of the biggest causes of venting. Further, they have bidirectional communication with a smart (SBS) charger. You'll never find any of that in a single "protected cell".


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



thedoc007 said:


> You have already made it abundantly clear you feel they are unsafe. When you ignore the evidence (thousands of CPF members use lithium-ion every day, with no trouble at all) I don't know what else can be done to convince you. No one is claiming that they are entirely safe, but nothing is...even your vaunted laptops, with all that fancy expensive circuitry, still have had numerous recalls due to fires. The risk is low enough for most, let us leave it at that. Personally I don't feel lithium-ion cells (or lights) are right for everyone, so I would encourage you to just go with other types, and stop beating a dead horse.





xeroid said:


> Point me to any LED flashlight you believe has these protection circuits built in. Using protected batteries do not encompass all the monitoring required for total protection. They are more designed for the re charging stage monitoring. The warnings are for a 2 cell flashlight (_smaller cells than 18650s_). Many power packs do monitor for shorts. The re charging of batteries and the use of them in flashlights are two different things. This thread is about the safety of using Lithium Ion flashlights, and not about charging batteries. Incorporating extensive protection circuits within a flashlight would not be costly, and therefore there really isn't a good reason why we are not seeing them.



Xeriod, your cellphone and laptop are as risky as using a li-ion flashlight. As thedoc007 has mentioned even the protection circuitry of laptops or cellphones are not 100% preventable. If you are trying to learn about li-ions you have to understand there is a slight risk in using them but no where as near if you are using them in a way that was not intended for them.

NiMH technology is more expensive than buying alkalines, yet they gained a fair percentage of market with Energizer and Duracell selling them. Granted flashlight li-ions are more of a hobby then regular usage but then many people who do use li-ion flashlights use them so the cost isn't really all that bad, but while regular flashlight owners probably wouldn't spend that much money on a good li-ion flashlight some of them might see the potential and buy a cheaper one that is more volatile and prone to problems. If you have issues in using li-ions in a flashlight then play around with NiMH batteries, check their charge levels and get a habit into checking the battery level and recharge them before a certain point. If you find yourself going past that certain point then li-ions might be too dangerous for you, but if you are keeping an eye on the charge levels you won't run into problems. 

But i wonder, why would you be curious about using li-ions if you are too worried about the dangerous sides of them? Sure they 'can' be dangerous but as i said in the beginning watch and take care of them. There should be better protections against li-ion dangers but this is why people out there who are not familiar with certain technology and the dangers should be learning all they can about it and practice the necessary safety guidelines in using that technology, li-ions among one of the top people should learn all they can about them.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> That's not true. Most laptop battery packs have much more sophisticated protection compared to "protected cells", e.g. laptop packs have multiple levels of redundant protection. Recent designs may also incorporate heuristics for detecting internal shorts - one of the biggest causes of venting. Further, they have bidirectional communication with a smart (SBS) charger. You'll never find any of that in a single "protected cell".



I did not mean laptop battery packs, but more simple battery packs. The chips used was not made for usage on a single loose battery, but for usage in battery packs and equipment.
Seiko has a long list of this type chips: http://www.sii-ic.com/en/semicon/products/power-management-ic/lithium-ion-battery-protection-ic/


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> I did not mean laptop battery packs, but more simple battery packs. The chips used was not made for usage on a single loose battery, but for usage in battery packs and equipment.
> Seiko has a long list of this type chips: http://www.sii-ic.com/en/semicon/products/power-management-ic/lithium-ion-battery-protection-ic/



That confirms my point - that the chips were not meant to be employed alone. Rather, they are supposed to be _one part_ of a complete battery management system - not simply slapped onto the end of 18650 cells by some "engineer" who has no clue about how to design a proper Li-ion BMS/PCM.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Not trying to prolong this discussion, but you are correct that we really do not know exactly what monitoring is going on for protection and safety reasons inside that Cell Phone charger. But by looking at it, there seems to be more there than a self protected Lithium Ion battery or if anyone opens up a laptop battery pack and takes a look at the electronic circuits and all the micro processors involved, you could easily conclude they take safety much more seriously. 

It's not just me who feels there is lack of built in safety within Lithium Ion Flashlights, but many in this thread have admitted the same with the argument that you should be aware and educated about them to reduce risk. As if it would be your fault if something went wrong. Let me make this argument in response: For a product as simple as a Flashlight widely available to any consumer, knowledgeable or not, without age restrictions or otherwise, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

Maybe the correct conclusion is to say that there is no government oversight or regulations involving the safety of LED flashlights.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> That confirms my point - that the chips were not meant to be employed alone. Rather, they are supposed to be _one part_ of a complete battery management system - not simply slapped onto the end of 18650 cells by some "engineer" who has no clue about how to design a proper Li-ion BMS/PCM.



Please list what a prober battery management system must do.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

It's not practical to have the same sort of battery management system in a $20 flashlight. It's similar to having some sort of activation/deactivation device on a $300 revolver.

There is always going to be some element of 'danger' associated with certain household items, be they a toaster, chainsaw, or basic flashlight.

Trying to idiot proof every device in the stream of commerce, only perpetuates a gene pool prone to failure and non-advancement.

Chris


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> if anyone opens up a laptop battery pack and takes a look at the electronic circuits and all the micro processors involved, you could easily conclude they take safety much more seriously.



A laptop battery contains cells in series, this means that the circuit must also include a balancing circuit (At least if they want long lifetime from the battery). With flashlights you usual take the batteries out to charge and do not need the balancing circuit.

Laptop batteries do also contain a communication channel, where the computer can ask for status and check that the battery pack is the correct brand, this is not really necessary for protection.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Laptop battery packs are better protected, but it doesn't stop them from exploding. Take this article for instance..



> "Fire experts say fires involving lithium-ion batteries in laptops are rare, but can happen. They say problems can occur when a laptop is being used with a fully charged battery while it’s plugged in"
> http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2014/06/30/bucks-county-woman-injured-when-laptop-computer-explodes/



It was most likely because of the replacment battery was not Dell approved..



> Dell tells customers that “using an incompatible battery or a third-party battery may increase the risk of fire or explosion and that they should replace the battery only with a battery purchased from Dell that is designed to work with their Dell computer.”
> Luff says she did replace the battery about three years ago. She is not sure if the replacement is from Dell.



So even though with all those protective circuitry there's still a chance that the battery packs can explode. Fire experts have a better idea, take the battery out when you are not using it or it reaches full and you still have the AC cord plugged in. It's best to unplug them once they are charged. It's kind of a pain to do but it's much safer than relying on that protective circuitry.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> It's not just me who feels there is lack of built in safety within Lithium Ion Flashlights, but many in this thread have admitted the same with the argument that you should be aware and educated about them to reduce risk. As if it would be your fault if something went wrong. Let me make this argument in response: For a product as simple as a Flashlight widely available to any consumer, knowledgeable or not, without age restrictions or otherwise, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.



I don't expect the government to protect me from everything. Sure, lithium-ion lights are less safe than NiMH or alkaline, but if someone wants to take a small risk, I think they should have that right.

If that lithium-ion light allows someone to go for a walk and get some exercise, they'll be way further ahead with a net benefit to their health.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Maybe the correct conclusion is to say that there is no government oversight or regulations involving the safety of LED flashlights.



I think that what we're talking about here, is 'probability.'

How probable is it that a properly functioning charger/battery combo is going to result in a problem when being used in a flashlight?

That probability, if it is high, determines the 'threat level' for governmental regulatory procedures.

The fact that they aren't regulated much beyond the basic UL, or EU equivalent, tells me that flashlights using li-ions aren't really high on the priority list.

In other words, while some cheap cells/batteries do vent with flame and cause some lights to grenade, it's not something that most people need to be worried about, when used properly.

Chris


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

HKJ said:


> Please list what a prober battery management system must do.



That cannot be adequately explained in a forum post. For an educated layperson, a nice exposition can be found in the book Battery Power Management for Portable Devices, by Yevgen Barsukov and Jinrong Qian (two of TI's experts behind their recent fuel gauges).


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> For a product as simple as a Flashlight widely available to any consumer, knowledgeable or not, without age restrictions or otherwise, doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.
> 
> Maybe the correct conclusion is to say that there is no government oversight or regulations involving the safety of LED flashlights.



...a quick google of "cell phone fire" shows what happens when literally millions of devices are handled daily. As the old saying goes, when you make something more idiot-proof then someone will come up with a better idiot. 

You can just walk into the store and buy drain cleaner. If you decide to drink it, government regulation can't stop that. The solution is not to ban drain cleaner, but let idiots take care of themselves and hope they don't take any of us with them.

Even so, the thing to note is that most people have never seen a cell phone blow up. When you net search for something, you'll find it. It doesn't mean it's guaranteed in your future. You don't have to be the guy throwing lions into a chipper shredder. Most of us don't boil our cell phones in coca cola (there's a thread on that,) accidentally bake them in the oven, or drop them down garbage dispoals. :duh2:

Many of us here prefer NiMH, many prefer the zap of Lions, but I'm pretty sure none of us want to do the stuff with our lights that gets you on Fark.com or something like that. We're a different demographic. A light holding 4 to 16 lions should be treated with respect, as it's most likely a quite expensive custom job. There are risks, but getting up in the morning does that too. Driving your sports car has risks, too.

In general, I'd say single cell NiMH is an excellent first choice for someone getting started out in this addiction. Prepare your wallet. It's going to get expensive, just a matter of time. 

Good luck, xeroid. I suggest starting with what you're going to carry and use each day. (EDC class.) It's much harder to make a mistake in this category unless you accidentally put a lion in a non-lion light and fry it. Even putting in a regular battery backwards won't fry a light these days as reverse polarity protection is becoming more prevalent. Not much to go boom with a single cell light, anyway.


----------



## ven (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Imo the "stories" of incidents that have occurred and all be them rare,if look into you can put it usually down to user error,to the point crap cheap cells and cheap chargers/flaslights usually multi cell .

I am yet to read about a fenix(just naming one well known brand ,but feel free to include any well known brand) exploding with some protected panasonic ICR cells in . Also to add ,that have been charged on an Xtar or Nitecore charger for example. The mentioned is quite a common set up for many users who have done a little research into good ,safe performance with flashlighs fed on lithium. There are also IMR /INR chemistries that are classed as a safer more stable chemistry under heavier loads(still not fool proof though and certainly require knowledge of not over discharging due to no protection). These types of cells are more associated with the "vaping" community,but also allow us flashaholics to enjoy and get the most out of more advanced or specific types of flashlights. 

The "vapers" (ecigs) certainly put a lot more hard use through IMR cells,using sub ohm coils,high W devices (some are 150W devices using up to 3 x 18650 cells as a more extreme example) and thats a device stuck in your mouth!!! . 

Most of the risk is during charging,be it poor quality cells,user error by over/under discharging. This can be dramatically reduced by using the right equipment(good recommended quality product/brands. 

Many items have lithium inside,be it power tools,as mentioned laptops,cell phones and electric cars are all potential risks,we have seen the cars on fire,laptop fires and also cell phone...............

Honestly my opinion is ,if feel that lithium and flashlight pose a serious risk,seriously consider using laptops,cell phones and even being in the vicinity of an electric car(this all may prove difficult as we are surrounded by the chemistry and its not going anywhere apart from getting more popular).

By no means am i an expert on he chemistries as others here,I just enjoy my lights and have done some research into the use of..........

I am sure some of the 245,287 members would have had many warnings up on the largest flashlight site CPF by now,over the years of use..................just a thought.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ven said:


> Most of the risk is during charging,be it poor quality cells,user error by over/under discharging. This can be dramatically reduced by using the right equipment(good recommended quality product/brands.



I think the issue is that many people won't buy quality products, and just buy the cheapest batteries and charger they can get from some Chinese site. But I don't think that's a place for government to step into, we already have enough interference when ordering stuff from overseas!

Consider it an opportunity to weed out the gene pool.



> I am sure some of the 245,287 members would have had many warnings up on the largest flashlight site CPF by now,over the years of use..................just a thought.



Well, there are some warnings here about lights exploding:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?330044-Dangerous-explosion-with-2-CR123A-primary

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?178411-My-flashlight-exploded


----------



## ven (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I think the issue is that many people won't buy quality products, and just buy the cheapest batteries and charger they can get from some Chinese site. But I don't think that's a place for government to step into, we already have enough interference when ordering stuff from overseas!
> 
> Consider it an opportunity to weed out the gene pool.
> 
> ...



Hi there WalkIntoTheLight,

True, there is always a risk of people buying inferior products right across the board(away from flashlights too) that pose risks,from fake apple chargers to ...........well we have copies of copies of items! Certainly ones ending in fire,but also more "prestige" branded lights as well.

Yes a couple,there are more,but none with PCB panasonic 18650 cells that are recommended by "people in the know" with recommended chargers . Some are quite dates stories too and like to think "we" have come a long way in knowledge and experience from both users and manufacturing of lithium's and accessories.

My point was more on the using the right equipment over cheap cells,without knowing the exact charger and brand of "primary" cell i cant comment further. However leaving cells in a light of any kind for 13 months is certainly not advised without checks. The cells draining completely shows a potential flashlight parasitic drain (or cell failure). If protected, or if removed from the light as not being used for over a year,imo could have been avoided. Of course just my opinion and certainly dont want to offend any one!( i am certainly far from perfect, i openly admit I have left cells in a light a few years back for an extended time,maybe i was fortunate!!), as they say "hindsight is a wonderful thing" . IMO we would not be aware of as many issues prior and these have educated us more over the years. Unfortunately we learn at the expense of others...........or maybe learning from the unfortunate ones is a better way of wording it(general comment).

The info on here is all available on here to have safe/happy flashlight use/enjoyment and has proved itself personally by educating me. This was before i actually joined CPF through searches.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> That cannot be adequately explained in a forum post. For an educated layperson, a nice exposition can be found in the book Battery Power Management for Portable Devices, by Yevgen Barsukov and Jinrong Qian (two of TI's experts behind their recent fuel gauges).



A very bad excuse, not all equipment has advanced fuel gauges or lot of other fancy status checking.
Instead of comparing flashlights to computers, it would be more correct to compare it to electric tools like hand held drills (That can also use LiIon batteries), or lots of other simpler devices.


----------



## Grizzman (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

The only way to accomplish the OP's goal is to have the light manufacturer create their own unique battery, and the light must only be usable with this battery pack. This allows the light to properly communicate with the cells to validate their condition. 

Surefire has used a proprietary battery pack in the past, and the new UDR Dominator uses one also. The Dominator doesn't even fit into the idiot proof category, since it can also use a battery carrier for CR123 cells. I'm sure there are multiple reasons why other manufacturers haven't done this....but a big one is because there is no demand for it.

It seems that xeroid and Gauss163 should start up a new safe flashlight company. Naturally, this light must be competitive with all other lights from size, output, run time, and durability perspectives Good luck!!


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

...the "Nerf Light."  How much? I'll take one. Can mine shoot the darts, too? 

Also, perhaps worth mentioning is the topic of "*intrinsically safe flashlights.*"

A quick CPF search of those words will tell quite a bit on this topic.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Grizzman said:


> The only way to accomplish the OP's goal is to have the light manufacturer create their own unique battery, and the light must only be usable with this battery pack. This allows the light to properly communicate with the cells to validate their condition.



Let's face it...differing people have differing comfort levels for everything in life. No problem with that, but li-ion cells aren't for everybody, much like reloading one's own ammunition isn't for everybody for a plethora of reasons. In the end, some people just aren't cut out for it.

However, the people who do enjoy li-ion power sources and reloading their own ammo, don't need to be badgered ad nauseam, after a few cursory inquiries.

Maybe OP has gotten the point?

Chris


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> A very bad excuse, not all equipment has advanced fuel gauges or lot of other fancy status checking.
> Instead of comparing flashlights to computers, it would be more correct to compare it to electric tools like hand held drills (That can also use LiIon batteries), or lots of other simpler devices.



That's the first time I've ever seen a literature reference called a "very bad excuse".

No one said anything about "advanced fuel gauges" or "fancy status checking", so it's not clear why you bring that up.

Please elaborate on why you think it is "more correct" to focus discussion on "simpler" devices. Simpler in what way, and how do you think that such simplicity affects safety design and safe device use?


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Why compare apples to oranges when we can compare flashlights to flashlights? There's no need for a car or power tool analogy.

As far as fancy status checking  for the purposes of safety, I've seen a few custom builds here that entail the inclusion of battery status and health checking. In these cases, it was part of the light and not part of the battery.

Otherwise, when the fancy battery fails then the replacement is more expensive. It makes sense to me for the "fancy health" stuff to be in the light body itself, not a consumable such as a battery as it would break standards and drive up costs.

What happens when the proprietary battery maker goes out of business? Your light goes permanently dark!

Batteries are a commodity. Protected cells already exist.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> That's the first time I've ever seen a literature reference called a "very bad excuse".
> 
> No one said anything about "advanced fuel gauges" or "fancy status checking", so it's not clear why you bring that up.
> 
> Please elaborate on why you think it is more correct to focus discussion on "simpler" devices. Simpler in what way, and how do you think that such simplicity affects safety design and safe device use?



Giving a literature reference on a simple question, instead of giving an answer is a bad excuse.

Try reading your own answer, before saying anything about fuel gauges.

I could turn that question around and ask why references to LiIon safety always mention laptop batteries and the software in laptops to show the charge status, My LiIon drill has never shown any "remaining runtime" or other fancy stuff for its LiIon cells, it just stops when the cells are empty, same as a protected battery.


----------



## Grizzman (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

I'm absolutely not badgering the OP. I just re-read the post, and I misunderstood it, though I don't consider anyone in this thread to be overly badgered.....yet.

I agree completely that Li-Ion usage in flashlights is not idiot proof. I agree that using multiple CR123s in flashlights is not idiot proof. They should be used by individuals that research and comprehend the risks and decide that the rewards out-weigh those risks. They should not be intended for the masses. 

It's a specialized application, and matches well with Chris' comparison to handloaded ammo. If I am very careful, I can make ammo tailored to a particular firearm that exceeds anything offered by a manufacturer. If I am careless, I can potentially cause great bodily harm to myself and others near me. This reminds me that I need to go trim more brass.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Nailed it, Griz. We can't learn stuff for someone else, that's their job to know the rules and risks. We won't be there to tell them they're doing something wrong. Fortunately, reading and asking questions is a great way to begin!

I handload. Someone told me once, "You can shoot that through your gun if you want, but I'm not." I feel that I pack shells better than Remington and Winchester. I managed a soft shooting, properly hitting custom load. Nobody could just give me that, I had to work on it. Have I made mistakes before? Sure. Still have all my fingers, though. If it doesn't fit, don't cram it harder.

Sounds exactly like enthusiast lion flashlights to me. Pass the lithium ion, please. Hold the alkalines. :thumbsup:

I only know that I don't know enough (as a general guideline.)


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Grizzman said:


> I'm absolutely not badgering the OP. I agree completely that Li-Ion usage in flashlights is not idiot proof. I agree that using multiple CR123s in flashlights is not idiot proof. They should be used by individuals that research and comprehend the risks and decide that the rewards out-weigh those risks. They should not be intended for the masses.
> 
> It's a specialized application, and matches well with Chris' comparison to handloaded ammo. If I am very careful, I can make ammo tailored to a particular firearm that exceeds anything offered by a manufacturer. If I am careless, I can potentially cause great bodily harm to myself and others near me.



I was referring to the OP and not you, when I stated badgering.

Nobody takes the time to educate themselves any longer and they want to be spoon fed the information, as quickly as possible, despite having vast resources at their fingertips.

You should have seen all the idiots who hit the gun boards after '08 and '12, buying up reloading presses, powder, primers, bullets, brass and not even buying a single reloading manual, or inquiring about all of the free reloading pamphlets available to us. 

The dolts figured that they'd just visit the gun boards and expect people who are veteran reloaders to just type a few paragraphs explaining everything we've learned over 20-40 years.

**** off noobs.

If the OP feels that modern lithium-ion powered flashlights are inherently dangerous, or unsafe due to the lack of some battery management system, then he's free to not play with them, but don't come to the battery forum and continually rag on those that manage to keep all fingers and their house in one piece.

Chris


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ChrisGarrett said:


> You should have seen all the idiots who hit the gun boards after '08 and '12, buying up reloading presses, powder, primers, bullets, brass and not even buying a single reloading manual, or inquiring about all of the free reloading pamphlets available to us.



(Protected vs unprotected) and (Lion vs NiMH) seems similar to (9mm vs .45,) now that you mention it...

Yep, having an item does not imply knowledge. Stockpile lead, but don't know how to cast bullets. Seen it plenty.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> Giving a literature reference on a simple question, instead of giving an answer is a bad excuse.



That gets to the heart of the matter - just how complex is proper design and use of devices powered by Li-ion cells?. Apparently you seem to think that this is a very simple matter - so simple that it can be explained in a short post here. I disagree. Entire books have been written on such matters. In general, I think that such safety matters are greatly oversimplified on many internet forums. If at times it seems that I lean a bit more towards the conservative side, it may be because I think that there should be a more balanced discussion on such important matters.



HKJ said:


> Try reading your own answer, before saying anything about fuel gauges.



It seems that you may have misinterpreted a remark made in passing. The only prior mention of fuel gauges above was a remark I made in passing about the authors of said book. When I said that they were behind the design of TI's fuel gauges that was meant to give some idea of their expertise - not to imply that fuel gauges have any bearing on the discussion at hand.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



more_vampires said:


> (Protected vs unprotected) and (Lion vs NiMH) seems similar to (9mm vs .45,) now that you mention it...
> 
> Yep, having an item does not imply knowledge. Stockpile lead, but don't know how to cast bullets. Seen it plenty.



Don't forget beans, no beans. 

Chris


----------



## HKJ (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> That gets to the heart of the matter - just how complex is proper design and use of devices powered by Li-ion cells?. Apparently you seem to think that this is a very simple matter - so simple that it can be explained in a short post here. I disagree. Entire books have been written on such matters. In general, I think that such safety matters are greatly oversimplified on many internet forums. If at times it seems that I lean a bit more towards the conservative side, it may be because I think that there should be a more balanced discussion on such important matters.



LiIon safety is not that complicated, I have already mentioned 3 parameters that the common protection chips checks for, what other parameters do you want?
Your comments look more like an attempt to obscure than anything else.

A more detailed discussion could include stuff like HRL and how it makes it nearly impossible to make a cell vent (That is not the same as an explosion, but the safety to prevent an explosion) or how all normal cell types usual has to pass some very rough tests (Heat, crush, shorts, drops, overcharge, etc.) before they are going to be sold on the market. Ultrafire etc. has probably not passed these tests, but that problem exist with many types of products.



Gauss163 said:


> It seems that you may have misinterpreted a remark made in passing. The only prior mention of fuel gauges above was a remark I made in passing about the authors of said book. When I said that they were behind the design of TI's fuel gauges that was meant to give some idea of their expertise - not to imply that fuel gauges have any bearing on the discussion at hand.



If it does not have any impact on the discussion, why include it? Yes I know, because people knowing how to build an integrator (The fuel gauge), must know everything about LiIon safety.


----------



## tandem (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Grizzman said:


> I agree that using multiple CR123s in flashlights is not idiot proof.



Personally I consider a 1x18650 powered light to be a safer tool than a 2xCR123 powered light. There are DEFINITELY more stories of 2xCR123 lights "exploding" on a patrol officer's belt than stories of exploding lights employing 1 *high quality* protected 18650 cell, charged on a known-good charger, used properly.

In fact... I'm not aware of a single instance of a high quality cell based on the now ubiquitous Panasonic LiNiCo cell, used in a properly built flashlight, charged by a known-good charger, that has resulted in an unfortunate event. 

On the other hand various makes of PantsOnFire cells in crap lights and suspect or proven bad chargers have exploded, gone into thermal runaway, and otherwise failed with unpleasant results. Some too-thrifty buyers are lucky to get away with merely finding out their "deal" simply doesn't work well and they have to re-buy the better product they should have started with in the first place.

Agree with HJK in pointing out the laptop analogy is a poor comparison. Cells permanently wired in series or series-parallel configurations need active management where a 1x18650 light simply does not. A 2x18650 light doesn't need laptop-level active management if those cells are being removed and individually charged. 

To the OP: A flash light user/buyer can choose to avoid multi-li-ion cell lights and select instead single cell lights. Current LED and cell technology is such that a great many use cases can be covered by single cell lights. Those who are fearful of managing their own power sources can always buy multi-cell NiMH rechargeable lights and rest easy.

If you are waiting for consumer-friendly li-ion lights - there are a limited selection out there. There will be more - you can see this already in the cycling light market. I gave my wife a fantastic li-ion powered cycling light (Cygo-Lite Expillion 850) for Christmas. It has an excellent cycling-friendly beam pattern, a unique "steady flash" mode where the output is never fully off, an XM-L2 emitter for efficiency, and... incorporates an industry leading Panasonic 18650 cell. USB chargeable. Completely consumer friendly.

While I'm comfortable with the Cygo-Lite product, does a veneer of consumer-friendly packaging mean all consumer-packaged products are better designed and built than the best products the flash light enthusiast market has access too? No, not necessarily. I'm 100% certain we'll see unsafe fully integrated supposedly consumer-grade products flogged by bad makers with no scruples and there will be accidents and fires as a result.

What the enthusiast flash light market has going for it is a great deal of expertise and institutional knowledge has been built up and CPF is truly one of the warehouses of this knowledge. You can make informed purchasing decisions by leaning on review and research work performed by members here like HJK and Selfbuilt and oh so many others.

Buy the right components (cells, lights, chargers), acquire the knowledge needed (not a big task), and relax.

Or buy a Maglite and NiMH cells and be done with it.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> LiIon safety is not that complicated [...]



If you think that Li-ion safety is so simple that it can be completely covered in a post here then please do so. That would be a great addition to this site (and also to your website)


----------



## magellan (Jan 9, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> If you think that Li-ion safety is so simple that it can be completely covered in a post here then please do so. That would be a great addition to this site (and also to your website)



In a way it's already been said here. Stick with NiMH and don't use them.


----------



## Norm (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

*Any* source of stored energy, *can* be dangerous when mishandled.

Norm


----------



## magellan (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Norm said:


> *Any* source of stored energy, *can* be dangerous when mishandled.
> 
> Norm



Yes. A good point to keep in mind.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> If you think that Li-ion safety is so simple that it can be completely covered in a post here then please do so. That would be a great addition to this site (and also to your website)



I have already covered a lot of what protection is needed, but you say something is missing. What about you do some work and add it.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Gentlemen common sense is what is needed and all these bogey men stories are just that.I use Lipo on my r/c race cars and I am far more likely to have an incident than anyone here using Li-On.As a safety precaution I use charging bags and will never leave the charging on if I need to leave the house.


----------



## gravelmonkey (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> Gentlemen common sense is what is needed and all these bogey men stories are just that.I use Lipo on my r/c race cars and I am far more likely to have an incident than anyone here using Li-On.As a safety precaution I use charging bags and will never leave the charging on if I need to leave the house.



To play devils advocate, anything that needs safety precautions/charging bags/cannot be left charging etc isn't idiot proof. 

I worked for a while in customer services for a company selling 12v battery chargers, powered garden equipment, power-tools etc I have to say that common sense is an oxymoron as it's not all that common.

The newer 1 cell, USB rechargeable lights are fairly simple, I'd happily gift one to even the most technologically illiterate (especially an 18650 sized light, as they can't put it in an AA charger).

However, the cheap bike lights with remote (?)4S1P battery packs worry me, there have been a few instances of them blowing up when charging - probably poor quality cells and or/a half-assed charging circuit.

Also, the cheap light, CREE/ultracrap/houseFIRE cells and a 'charger shaped object' bundles on eBay/Amazon for pennies is a pet hate of mine- the average Amazon user has no idea how potentially dangerous the 2nd rate cell and rubbish charger is, and they could be my neighbors! (same goes for candles in a power-cut, but that's a different rant ).

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that" - George Carlin.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



gravelmonkey said:


> To play devils advocate, anything that needs safety precautions/charging bags/cannot be left charging etc isn't idiot proof.
> 
> I worked for a while in customer services for a company selling 12v battery chargers, powered garden equipment, power-tools etc I have to say that common sense is an oxymoron as it's not all that common.
> 
> ...




I use charging bags for Lipo only so let us get that out of the way first as Lipo are more likely to have an issue.This is a site for hobbyists so I presume many will have a better idea common sense wise than the average spanners you were serving .

I have said it before and will say it again I do not buy these so called deals on fleabay or that other place.I know where they get half the tat they sell from.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> Gentlemen common sense is what is needed and all these bogey men stories are just that.I use Lipo on my r/c race cars and I am far more likely to have an incident than anyone here using Li-On.As a safety precaution I use charging bags and will never leave the charging on if I need to leave the house.




Exactly, common sense is necessary when using these battery types. I always leave my laptop battery sitting out when it doesn't need to be charged and unplug my cellphone when i have 80% or more in the battery. I never even knew Li-ions could explode had i not been reading on li-ion safety. It certainly encouraged me to take special precautions with the laptop and cellphone. I will take the proper precautions when i get a li-ion flashlight. It's simple and easily preventable.


----------



## tandem (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



gravelmonkey said:


> the cheap light, CREE/ultracrap/houseFIRE cells and a 'charger shaped object' bundles on eBay/Amazon for pennies is a pet hate of mine- the average Amazon user has no idea how potentially dangerous the 2nd rate cell and rubbish charger is, and they could be my neighbors! (same goes for candles in a power-cut, but that's a different rant ).
> 
> "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realise that half of them are stupider than that" - George Carlin.



That's a good Carlin quote. I'm using it.

And I share your rant. There's a ton of crap flooding the world from shady sources being peddled on-line to unsuspecting buyers, most of which will never stop off at CPF first for an education. Hopefully they won't get their learnin' the hard way.

Meanwhile, I've little fear for the motivated buyer of quality li-ion powered flash light products who either possesses innate common sense, or takes the time to learn here.


----------



## tandem (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> I have already covered a lot of what protection is needed, but you say something is missing. What about you do some work and add it.



The book your correspondent quoted is something of a high-level manual for systems integrators.

This entire site offers a detailed practical implementation manual for individuals doing their own system development work (buy light, buy charger, buy battery, use product safely). :twothumbs

To the OP, again, you should worry more about consumer-grade li-ion products that *don't* have a community like this one surrounding them. How many products are being sold out there that don't have expert technical review of chargers and battery systems? Tons.

Think that USB wall wart charger is innocuous just because it's a "consumer" item? Think again.

Here... we have people looking at everything.


----------



## gravelmonkey (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> Exactly, common sense is necessary when using these battery types. I always leave my laptop battery sitting out when it doesn't need to be charged and unplug my cellphone when i have 80% or more in the battery. *I never even knew Li-ions could explode had i not been reading on li-ion safety.* It certainly encouraged me to take special precautions with the laptop and cellphone. I will take the proper precautions when i get a li-ion flashlight. It's simple and easily preventable.



I think that's the entire point that OP was trying to make, anything you need to 'read up on' is no longer idiot proof.

That said, we do not need any kind of government regulation/oversight/guidelines etc, especially for a hobby forum.


----------



## tandem (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Yet when you install one or more of these into a flashlight, you have essentially sealed it, and removed it's only safety feature.



Incorrect; the vent is not the cell's only safety feature.



xeroid said:


> Can this be a problem, is this a problem that flashlight designers have addressed?



Incompatible goals. Many flashlight designs prize water-tightness. Keeping water out of a light is also a safety feature. 



xeroid said:


> I also note that the battery packs in a laptop are also sealed with no way for air to escape



Incorrect.


----------



## 18650 (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> I do not care less whether they were designed for flash lights or not and I have no idea why you are telling me,in the interests of common sense I would not be using some old tatty battery when I can buy an 18650 which is fit for purpose from a reputable vendor with a proper warranty. I would love to see an insurance loss adjuster working out a claim for a faulty non working expensive light when you tell him you fuelled it up on non approbate batteries.:devil:


 From Panasonic's own NCR18650B "safety precautions": 

Do not insert the battery into equipment designed to be hermetically sealed. In some cases hydrogen or oxygen may be discharged from the cell which may result in rupture, fire or explosion. 

That's what the manufacturer of the battery says.


----------



## tandem (Jan 10, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



18650 said:


> From Panasonic's own NCR18650B "safety precautions":
> 
> Do not insert the battery into equipment designed to be hermetically sealed. In some cases hydrogen or oxygen may be discharged from the cell which may result in rupture, fire or explosion.
> 
> That's what the manufacturer of the battery says.



Panasonic also says that about the intrinsically safe Eneloop NiMH:



> Please do not use eneloop and SANYO Ni-MH batteries on underwaterlight and sealed application. SANYO Ni-MH batteries contain a gas
> release vent, which allows releasing hydrogen, when the battery is
> misused.


Source: http://panasonic.net/energy/eneloop/pdf/eneloop_handbook.pdf

Meanwhile... some of the leading underwater diving light makers routinely use lithium ion cells in their lights.

Next?


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



18650 said:


> From Panasonic's own NCR18650B "safety precautions":
> 
> Do not insert the battery into equipment designed to be hermetically sealed. In some cases hydrogen or oxygen may be discharged from the cell which may result in rupture, fire or explosion.
> 
> That's what the manufacturer of the battery says.




Well blow me down,a little tiny battery is going to blow my torch up,better get myself a safer hobby,Cannot wait to get to the pub and tell my mates there work lights are in imminent danger of maybe blowing up.:nana:


----------



## xeroid (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> Panasonic also says that about the intrinsically safe Eneloop NiMH:
> 
> 
> Source: http://panasonic.net/energy/eneloop/pdf/eneloop_handbook.pdf
> ...



And what does this tell you? It just tells everyone here that flashlight manufacturers are ignorant, and choose to ignore the safety precautions put out by the battery manufacturer themselves.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> And what does this tell you? It just tells everyone here that flashlight manufacturers are ignorant, and choose to ignore the safety precautions put out by the battery manufacturer themselves.



Or it tells me that the lawyers for Panasonic/Sanyo, LG, Samsung and Sony all err on the side of being overly-cautious, in order to prevent future liability on the part of their employers.

I see it all of the time in 'reloading manuals,' which are (we joke) written by the lawyers and not the ballisticians. 

Chris


----------



## tandem (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ChrisGarrett said:


> it tells me that the lawyers for Panasonic/Sanyo, LG, Samsung and Sony all err on the side of being overly-cautions, in order to prevent future liability on the part of their employers.



A-1 answer! Of course it's Cover-Yer-*** legal language. 

Adding some humour to this, Panasonic warns about deploying cells in equipment that might get wet (implying a sealed system is required) and in the very next breath warns systems developers against designing sealed systems. Good job, Panasonic legal team!

xeroid, you claim to want to come here to learn yet you quite obviously are working hard to inject anything that bolster your preconceived notions whether the injection makes sense or not.


----------



## tandem (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> And what does this tell you? It just tells everyone here that flashlight manufacturers are ignorant, and choose to ignore the safety precautions put out by the battery manufacturer themselves.



That's a naive interpretation.

Battery makers are in the business of creating products that store significant amounts of energy in small containers. They need to cover their asses in case the end user (which from their perspective are equipment makers, not the equipment users) does something truly stupid like allow water to infiltrate the cell compartment.

Under normal conditions, releasing the energy in a circuit to drive a LED light will cause no issues. If the cell is abused, or if the charging circuit or methodology isn't sound, of if... egads, the light isn't sealed and water penetrates the light, or the cells are abused - bad things may happen. When energy is released *very* quickly bad things generally do happen. That's why they put the CYA language in there. Meanwhile industry has real life problems to solve and they can produce safe products by engineering equipment and charging systems correctly.

What's more _ignorant _(using your word)? Designing a robust, safe, light and container designed to protect the cell and keep it dry? Or designing a container which allows moisture and water to penetrate?

How about a real life example: What do makers of lights used by first responders the world over do? They *seal *them.

If you are a firefighter with a helmet mounted SureFire G2X believe me you are thankful the light is *sealed*.

You've more to learn. Try not to be so sanctimonious before you get there.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> A-1 answer! Of course it's Cover-Yer-*** legal language.
> 
> Adding some humour to this, Panasonic warns about deploying cells in equipment that might get wet (implying a sealed system is required) and in the very next breath warns systems developers against designing sealed systems. Good job, Panasonic legal team!
> 
> xeroid, you claim to want to come here to learn yet you quite obviously are working hard to inject anything that bolster your preconceived notions whether the injection makes sense or not.



I could see the implementation of some sort of 'one time' pressure release valve on flashlight bodies--'one time' because after a cell blew, you probably wouldn't want to re-use the light.

It would add cost, but you could design something that would still have 'water tight' integrity, but would break at whatever internal pressure...30 PSI?

Chris


----------



## tandem (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

A pressure release mechanism might be worth integrating into li-ion (or lithium primary) light designs, presuming there is a problem. But it is not at all clear we should presume there is a problem.

If there is a problem to be identified it would be too-cheap buyers spending their cash on dicey crap products. It's these buyers and products that have been implicated in virtually all of the dangerous failures of lithium-ion powered lights.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ChrisGarrett said:


> I could see the implementation of some sort of 'one time' pressure release valve on flashlight bodies--'one time' because after a cell blew, you probably wouldn't want to re-use the light.
> 
> It would add cost, but you could design something that would still have 'water tight' integrity, but would break at whatever internal pressure...30 PSI?
> 
> Chris



Chris should design flashlights. He takes the battery manufacturers warnings seriously, as should everyone else. Batteries in sealed flashlights have exploded before, and they will again. 

It may be a rare occurrence, but there is nothing you can really do about predicting if your light is the next one that will explode. It could be a problem internal to the battery that is not detectable, or a sudden circuit failure in the light itself. The cell is designed to release pressure when something does go wrong, but it can't when completely sealed inside a flashlight tube. 

I can assure you that I would never put my name on a flashlight designed without incorporating all battery manufactures safety warnings. Safety concerned consumers would have no problem paying more. Most of these flashlights are banned and not allowed in critical environments. Nuclear power plants, gas plants and so on. They simply are not safe enough. Are they safe enough for consumers? I guess that is for each individual to decide.


----------



## Norm (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I don't think the government really cares, it's really not their problem.


Turning your thread into a political discussion is the quickest way to see your thread closed - Norm


----------



## xeroid (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Norm said:


> Turning your thread into a political discussion is the quickest way to see your thread closed - Norm



Referenced sentence removed :thumbsup: "I don't think the government really cares, it's really not their problem." Replaced with: (I guess that is for each individual to decide.)


----------



## tandem (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Most of these flashlights are banned and not allowed in critical environments.



No they aren't. Not only that, 99.9% of all flashlights ever produced since time began *do not* meet various ATEX / MSHA requirements for use in hazardous environments.

Why would you consider this a problem?

Do you walk into The Gap (or whatever popular modern clothing store that exists in your area) expecting to find anti-static clothing certified for use in potentially explosive environments?


----------



## xeroid (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> No they aren't. Not only that, 99.9% of all flashlights ever produced since time began *do not* meet various ATEX / MSHA requirements for use in hazardous environments.
> 
> Why would you consider this a problem?
> 
> Do you walk into The Gap (or whatever popular modern clothing store that exists in your area) expecting to find anti-static clothing certified for use in potentially explosive environments?



What you meant to say is " YES THEY ARE BANNED", not No they aren't. The point is that these critical environments recognize that these lights are not safe enough. They have an inherent lack of safety considerations that could be catastrophic in such environments. So they are banned and only lights that meet the ATEX / MSHA SAFETY requirements would be considered. So it really goes back to the question, "are these flashlights really safe enough for consumers?" flashlights using high powered batteries without safety features? I guess that is for each of us to decide, if we want to take the risk. 

Personally I'll stay away from Lithium Ion driven flashlights, partly due to the responses in this thread or until such a time that I feel comfortable in the way they are designed. Many of you apparently are willing to take the risk, and I understand your points that most of you are smart enough to take as many precautions as possible. However, there is no precaution you can take, short of re designing the flashlight, that can assure you your light won't be the next one that will explode. You can make it less likely to happen, but there just doesn't seem to be a good reason why these lights are not designed to be idiot proof, when I am certain people would be happy to pay more for them.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Referenced sentence removed :thumbsup: "I don't think the government really cares, it's really not their problem." Replaced with: (I guess that is for each individual to decide.)



I actually don't worry about lights not having a pressure relief valve and I have a lot of li-ion lights that I run, that don't have them.

I guess it just comes down to 'comfort level' and I guess that I'm comfortable with them not having a pressure relief valve.

Again, if you're not comfortable with lights running li-ions with some PRV not being incorporated within the design, then don't buy them.

Most of us here are quite content to run them this way and most of us haven't, or won't have, issues going forward.

Chris


----------



## xeroid (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ChrisGarrett said:


> Most of us here are quite content to run them this way and most of us haven't, or won't have, issues going forward.
> 
> Chris



This is most likely true, ..... I just don't want to end up being the unlucky one :shakehead


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 11, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> [...] I understand your points that most of you are smart enough to take as many precautions as possible.



Safety competence requires more than smarts. It also requires the discipline to _unerringly _and _consistently _follow the safety guidelines _every _time. You can't ever slack off. You can't think "I've done this a hundred times and never had problems, so maybe I can skip this - the safety concerns are probably overblown".

There are well-documented cases of scientists having the smarts but lacking in safety discipline e.g. Slotin's infamous tickling the dragon's tail by using a screwdriver to perform critical mass tests on plutonium (the "demon core"). He knew well the risks - Fermi even warned him that he'd be "dead within a year" if he continued doing that. Unfortunately, Fermi was correct.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> What you meant to say is " YES THEY ARE BANNED", not No they aren't. The point is that these critical environments recognize that these lights are not safe enough. They have an inherent lack of safety considerations that could be catastrophic in such environments. So they are banned and only lights that meet the ATEX / MSHA SAFETY requirements would be considered. So it really goes back to the question, "are these flashlights really safe enough for consumers?" flashlights using high powered batteries without safety features? I guess that is for each of us to decide, if we want to take the risk.
> 
> Personally I'll stay away from Lithium Ion driven flashlights, partly due to the responses in this thread or until such a time that I feel comfortable in the way they are designed. Many of you apparently are willing to take the risk, and I understand your points that most of you are smart enough to take as many precautions as possible. However, there is no precaution you can take, short of re designing the flashlight, that can assure you your light won't be the next one that will explode. You can make it less likely to happen, but there just doesn't seem to be a good reason why these lights are not designed to be idiot proof, when I am certain people would be happy to pay more for them.




You have more chance of being knocked over by a car crossing the road than ever having an issue with a low voltage Li-ON battery.LI-PO on the other hand the odds are raised a bit but not much.I would quit the worry and just enjoy your hobby or better still in your case find another less troubling one like collecting watches or pens,I would suggest knives but no doubt you would end up cutting yourself.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> This is most likely true, ..... I just don't want to end up being the unlucky one :shakehead



We're spinning our wheels here.

Again, for the fifth, or sixth, time, if you're not comfortable using modern flashlights that are able to run li-ion cells, don't buy them.

We're all happy campers here, running lights that do take li-ion cells.

You obviously don't feel comfortable running them and your above reply, should be your last.

I hope that either Norm, or SilverFox (Tom) shuts this thread down, as we're just 'beating a dead horse.'

Chris


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

The nice thing about today's lights is you don't actually have to use lithium-ion batteries to get a really bright and compact light. I just ordered a Sunwayman D40A. Runs off 4 AA cells, and puts out almost 1000 lumens in a very compact light.

If you don't like lithium-ion (and I'm one, but for different reasons than safety), then stick with AA NiMH cells.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> You have more chance of being knocked over by a car crossing the road than ever having an issue with a low voltage Li-ON battery.LI-PO on the other hand the odds are raised a bit but not much.I would quit the worry and just enjoy your hobby or better still in your case find another less troubling one like collecting watches or pens,I would suggest knives but no doubt you would end up cutting yourself.



This, lol. I have a better chance at winning the lottery than to have a Li-ion battery blow up on me. I never won even a dollar.



xeroid said:


> What you meant to say is " YES THEY ARE BANNED", not No they aren't. The point is that these critical environments recognize that these lights are not safe enough. They have an inherent lack of safety considerations that could be catastrophic in such environments. So they are banned and only lights that meet the ATEX / MSHA SAFETY requirements would be considered. So it really goes back to the question, "are these flashlights really safe enough for consumers?" flashlights using high powered batteries without safety features? I guess that is for each of us to decide, if we want to take the risk.
> 
> Personally I'll stay away from Lithium Ion driven flashlights, partly due to the responses in this thread or until such a time that I feel comfortable in the way they are designed. Many of you apparently are willing to take the risk, and I understand your points that most of you are smart enough to take as many precautions as possible. However, there is no precaution you can take, short of re designing the flashlight, that can assure you your light won't be the next one that will explode. You can make it less likely to happen, but there just doesn't seem to be a good reason why these lights are not designed to be idiot proof, when I am certain people would be happy to pay more for them.




It's totally up to you if you do not want to use Li-ions. With the way some people treat their possessions, i wouldn't want them using Li-ions either (like the ones who buy new products just to break them or stick them in boiling coke). As a hobbyist though you'd be missing out, i probably wouldn't EDC or use a Li-ion flashlight for everyday use but back then i didn't think i would do the same for alkalines/NiMHs. We already know that you won't use Li-ion flashlights and that's completely ok. I guess that's why we haven't seen them in the regular AA/AAA/D/C/9v quite yet and it's only Lithiums. I have yet to see any proof that by using Li-ions correctly could cause them to explode. It also shows that people are too lazy to educate themselves on proper usage of technology and have to rely on the safety features to use them. Not that having safety features is a bad thing and i didn't know Li-ion batteries are dangerous before i joined this forum but anyone who knows about Li-ion flashlights would know of the dangers involved anyway and take precautions. And it goes back to cellphone and laptops that they are not 100% safe either and you should unplug your device (or battery) once it's charged. They won't even tell you how to keep your batteries healthy either otherwise most people would still have their original battery pack. I can't get more than 20 minutes out of my laptop battery and it makes sense now.



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The nice thing about today's lights is you don't actually have to use lithium-ion batteries to get a really bright and compact light. I just ordered a Sunwayman D40A. Runs off 4 AA cells, and puts out almost 1000 lumens in a very compact light.
> 
> If you don't like lithium-ion (and I'm one, but for different reasons than safety), then stick with AA NiMH cells.



I don't typically use Li-ions either and it's mostly because you have to baby them to get best performance and to avoid damaging them. NiMh cells you can use them and not have to worry too much about them just recharge when the light dims out. Normally i will check the voltage on them but i try doing that to see whether i should get a li-ion flashlight or not. So far it seems to be fine and i'm not too worried about Li-ion problems. How is that Sunwayman light? I saw it on Amazon and thought about getting one.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> And it goes back to cellphone and laptops that they are not 100% safe either and you should unplug your device (or battery) once it's charged. They won't even tell you how to keep your batteries healthy either otherwise most people would still have their original battery pack. I can't get more than 20 minutes out of my laptop battery and it makes sense now.



Well, I'm not so sure that even babying a lithium-ion battery pack will get you much more life out of it. I babied my last laptop battery pack. I very seldom used it, so 95% of the time it was taken out of the laptop and left on a shelf. Usually not 100% charged, but I admit it was sitting full some of the time.

I compared that to another laptop, bought around the same time, where its battery was always plugged in and always 100% charged (except for occasional use when not on a main power supply).

Both batteries suck, after about 3 years. They only last about 30 minutes now, compared to about 3 hours when they were new. Babying one of the batteries didn't seem to make any difference.




> I don't typically use Li-ions either and it's mostly because you have to baby them to get best performance and to avoid damaging them.



That, and from my generally bad experiences with the longevity of lithium-ion batteries. Whether it be laptops, cameras, phones, etc., they never seem to perform very well beyond about 3 years. Contrast that with my oldest Eneloops, 8.5 years old, which still perform just like new.



> NiMh cells you can use them and not have to worry too much about them just recharge when the light dims out. Normally i will check the voltage on them but i try doing that to see whether i should get a li-ion flashlight or not. So far it seems to be fine and i'm not too worried about Li-ion problems. How is that Sunwayman light? I saw it on Amazon and thought about getting one.



Heh, still sitting in customs. I haven't actually got my hands on it yet. But I've got the batteries all ready for it!


----------



## xeroid (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Even though I'm a Electronics Technician, and would certainly respect Lithium Ion batteries, and take all the precautions available to me, it still doesn't guarantee an accident free experience. It actually worries me some the way these Lithium Ion driven lights are designed and the lack of protection circuitry employed in these devices when they are sealed up inside a container. For me, the extra work involved to minimize your risks of a hazard, just to keep your flashlight experience and use of, safe, seems unappealing when this could all be easily taken care of with a better designed flashlight. And that's certainly an option I am considering, is to design a flashlight that is more safe than anything available on the market today. Like other products on the market using sealed containers with Lithium Ion cells, the extra protection circuitry to detect rising temperatures, pressure release and so on, that would shut down your light before an accident is possible, would certainly make these lights safer. With today's designs, even though accidents are rare, and the odds of an explosion are greatly reduced when you understand what you need to do, the potential that it could fail, through no fault of your own, and the nasty chemistry that could be released is enough for me to choose Ni MH driven lights over Lithium Ion until I either design my own, or one is available.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> [...] And it goes back to cellphone and laptops that they are not 100% safe either and you should unplug your device (or battery) once it's charged. They won't even tell you how to keep your batteries healthy either otherwise most people would still have their original battery pack. I can't get more than 20 minutes out of my laptop battery and it makes sense now.



Devices such as laptops and cellphones which have integrated chargers are inherently much safer than devices that don't - see the above discussion. Also, nowadays many (most?) laptops have "battery saver" software which allows the user to conserve battery health by charging them to less than 100% for standby use. Using such software (and a little Li-ion common sense) one can easily achieve optimal battery life. For example, some of my laptop batteries are pushing 10 years old and still in great health (the oldest batteries are now repurposed as general-purpose power supplies, since those laptops are now dinosaurs).


----------



## reppans (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Well, I'm not so sure that even babying a lithium-ion battery pack will get you much more life out of it. I babied my last laptop battery pack. I very seldom used it, so 95% of the time it was taken out of the laptop and left on a shelf. Usually not 100% charged, but I admit it was sitting full some of the time.
> 
> I compared that to another laptop, bought around the same time, where its battery was always plugged in and always 100% charged (except for occasional use when not on a main power supply).
> 
> ...



This is anecdotal of course, but I've moved over to an iPad3 Retina as my primary computing/surfing device since it was released in March 2012 (~3 yrs ago) and have always charged it on a light timer nightly, on average cycling 75-25-75, with charging set to run ~6-8am, or just before I start using it. This only costs me ~5 additional secs a night (if I have adjust the charge time), and it minimizes my peak and average charge voltages over the long run. 

Three or four times a year (monthly is recommended), I run a 100-0-100 cycle for the battery meter recalibration thing and I get about 15hrs of runtime from a full charge (no music, all screen/typing/surfing usage)..... and it really hasn't changed from day 1 to my last test a few months ago. I have no need to upgrade this device, it services my purposes perfectly, and I will keep using it until the battery had degraded significantly.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> Devices such as laptops and cellphones which have integrated chargers are inherently much safer than devices that don't - see the above discussion. Also, nowadays many (most?) laptops have "battery saver" software which allows the user to conserve battery health by charging them to less than 100% for standby use. Using such software (and a little Li-ion common sense) one can easily achieve optimal battery life. For example, some of my laptop batteries are pushing 10 years old and still in great health (the oldest batteries are now repurposed as general-purpose power supplies, since those laptops are now dinosaurs).



I had no idea there was software out there for that. I know there's the ability to choose how low you can discharge the battery and put it into hibernation if you get to a certain level. YES they are safer with the integrated safety features but it's not impossible to have a serious problem either. Again Li-ion common sense is necessary to have healthy and happy batteries.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Well, I'm not so sure that even babying a lithium-ion battery pack will get you much more life out of it. I babied my last laptop battery pack. I very seldom used it, so 95% of the time it was taken out of the laptop and left on a shelf. Usually not 100% charged, but I admit it was sitting full some of the time.
> 
> I compared that to another laptop, bought around the same time, where its battery was always plugged in and always 100% charged (except for occasional use when not on a main power supply).
> 
> ...



Well as experts have mentioned Li-ions like to stay charged anywhere from 40-80%. I'm trying that with my newer cellphone to see if that's the truth and see how long they would last compared to 3 years which is the typical lifespan i get from Li-ion cells. Eneloops and NiMHs in general i have had better luck with but that certainly doesn't mean i won't get some Li-ions to test out.




> Heh, still sitting in customs. I haven't actually got my hands on it yet. But I've got the batteries all ready for it!



Ah, well it looks like a good light i'd like to hear how it is before buying one .


----------



## tandem (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> What you meant to say is " YES THEY ARE BANNED"



No, I did not mean to say that. Please don't insert your language into my comments.

"Banned" is not the proper terminology. When looking at items approved for use in explosive environments, "certified" is the term you are looking for.

Employers are responsible for identifying which certified tools they approve for use in their workplace environment. 

A relative small handful of makers produce lights for explosive environments. The operational requirements for hazardous, explosive, environments are not the same operational requirements consumers have, nor are they the same for the vast majority of commercial users, or even for first responders including police, or fire fighters for most call outs.



> The point is that these critical environments recognize that these lights [have] an inherent lack of safety considerations that could be catastrophic in such environments.



Again I say: so what? An electric toothbrush isn't approved for use in an explosive environment either. Your point is about as relevant as the toothbrush example. No one should be shopping the CPF pages to look for ATEX/MSHA certified lighting. No one. They should be seeking out approved light models from their employer, full stop.

If a MSHA certificate number is *your *definition of what constitutes a safe flash light for consumer use, then *you *need to shop elsewhere. Here, I'll help you - this link provides a listing of the current MSHA Part 20 approved lights. You can buy a light from the 1950's if you can find one still, although a more modern Pelican or Streamlight would be a better choice, or for $20 - $30 you can get an Eveready Mine Safety 2AA or http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/1259.pdf2D model. Luxuriate in the massive *9 lumen output *(Yes, 9 lumen, that's not a typo)

http://www.msha.gov/TECHSUPP/ACC/lists/20flshlt.pdf



> So it really goes back to the question, "are these flashlights really safe enough for consumers?"



MSHA certification or lack thereof has nothing at all to do with safety for consumers, unless you happen to know consumers that live in methane-rich or explosive-dust prone homes. There are thousands of lights that do not carry MSHA certification that can be considered perfectly safe for consumer use. 



> flashlights using high powered batteries without safety features?



Again you perpetuate mis-truths in your zeal to justify an opinion. Why?

Well designed flashlights commonly discussed here have a number of safety features. Commonly found in most lights are regulation circuits designed to terminate flashlight operation when cell voltages drop to levels beyond which are considered unsafe. Some lights also include regulation that takes in to account thermal performance. These are both safety features.

Well designed chargers commonly discussed here also have safety features including under and over-volt protection, charge cut-off, and thermal protection. Depending on the cell chemistry, some chargers will also incorporate safety timers to account for sometimes undetectable end of charge triggers. There are many safety considerations taken into account in the design of a truly good charger.

Depending on the chemistry, some power cells themselves incorporate safety features. Li-ion cells designed to be sold individually for flash light (and other equipment use like the now ubiquitous "vaping" tools) have protective circuits built within them to protect against over and under discharge and dead shorts.

In the forgoing I've listed numerous safety features yet again you've claimed lights and/or "batteries" don't have safety features. I wonder why you keep making this absurd claim.



> Personally I'll stay away from Lithium Ion driven flashlights



That sounds like a good idea, particularly since your focus on safety is in the wrong areas.

Look at the history of issues related to lithium-ion, and lithium primary (non-rechargeable "consumer") use related to flash lights and you'll find the problems revolve around:

- bad, or counterfeit bad, cells (epidemic problem on eBay, even Amazon, and direct sales)
- bad chargers (so many observed problems to list)
- bad lights (lacking voltage cutoffs, weak or bad physical design leading to shorts)
- bad products with counterfeit safety certifications (including MSHA!)


Just review the threads in the sub-forum of this forum dedicated to such issues and you'll have a better sense of from where real risk arises: sources. There simply is too much crap product being produced, mostly in China, being flogged to an unsuspecting public over the internet but also increasingly now in store fronts. 100% of the problems reported to date trace back to bad products, often bought by persons trying to save a buck or two. 

The root problem is of course bad actors in the manufacturing and distribution end. Fly by night companies that will simply rename themselves and carry on business the next day if they are implicated in a serious failure... if they even are embarrassed enough to take that step. "Consumers" are complicit too - people have turned into consumers, abdicating all responsibility for their protection to the maker or a government, rather than taking an active role in their own safety.

At least here on CPF we have people dedicated to safety and understanding all the components of a lighting _system_ (cells, chargers, lights) such that an individual can, with the knowledge and guidance available here, assemble a safe _system_.



> However, there is no precaution you can take, short of re designing the flashlight, that can assure you your light won't be the next one that will explode.



Your focus on exploding flash lights is duly noted. Really you should be more concerned about charging.

There have been more fires and deaths associated with charging mishaps than injuries from exploding flash lights. Laptops, cell phones, radio controlled hobby craft, crap bike lights / packs / chargers - you name it. Interestingly enough... none of the forgoing list are typically in an air-tight seal. ;-)


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> I had no idea there was software out there for that. I know there's the ability to choose how low you can discharge the battery and put it into hibernation if you get to a certain level. YES they are safer with the integrated safety features but it's not impossible to have a serious problem either. Again Li-ion common sense is necessary to have healthy and happy batteries.



I think it's a more recent inclusion for laptops. My older laptops didn't have it, but a Toshiba I bought this year has an "eco mode" which will only charge up your battery to 80%.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> http://www.msha.gov/TECHSUPP/ACC/lists/20flshlt.pdf



Cool, thanks for that. I was considering adding an intrinsically safe to my collection for snits and griggles. Definitely not optimized for output!


----------



## tandem (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> I had no idea there was software out there for that. I know there's the ability to choose how low you can discharge the battery and put it into hibernation if you get to a certain level.



Typically the laptop has a power-use customization feature where you can set the upper and lower boundaries for charging. It should operate at the firmware level, not at the operating system level - this allows you to run other operating systems than just Windows but still get the benefit.

The very first thing I do with every new laptop is set max charge to 80%. The laptop I'm writing this note (Lenovo X220) will be four years old in a couple months and it still maintains most of its original capacity.

In an attempt to tie this back to the subject at hand, the Lenovo is an example of good engineering producing a product that is safe in the hands of consumers - subject to common sense in its use - that has features to extend the life of the lithium ion battery pack.

A relevant example in the flashlight world would be a known-good charger that provides detailed cell charge status feedback such as one of the XTAR models HJK has so thoroughly reviewed. When paired with good, circuit protected Panasonic cells, the XTAR charger will safely charge the cells and the user can determine if they want to implement a "battery saving" routine by pulling the cells out when 80% charge is reached. If they want to automate that process they'll have to wait for drop-in charger makers to add such a feature, or resort to a multi-chemistry hobby charger where such parameters typically can be set by the operator. Pair that power source + charger with a known good li-ion powered flashlight and you've got a safe system.

The major difference between the laptop and the flash light is Lenovo was the systems integrator for the former, we as individuals are the systems integrators for the latter.

I'm quite ok with that.


----------



## tandem (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



more_vampires said:


> Cool, thanks for that. I was considering adding an intrinsically safe to my collection for snits and griggles. Definitely not optimized for output!



Thankfully some of the Streamlights are 100+ lumens out.

9 lumen output in a cave I'm sure is useful for some purposes although we are spoiled here and would expect massively long runtimes for such low output. 

I had an opportunity to use a small variable output 1xAA light in a decommissioned mine. It's shocking how little output is needed to go from absolutely dark to light-enough to walk around. Eyes are amazing things.


----------



## ven (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



ChrisGarrett said:


> We're spinning our wheels here.
> 
> Again, for the fifth, or sixth, time, if you're not comfortable using modern flashlights that are able to run li-ion cells, don't buy them.
> 
> ...




Agree 100% Chris

This is really going nowhere imo, i think mr xeroid had his mind made up before this thread and no matter what is said,advised...........its a waste of time.

On a lighter note Look away if easily 
My spare cell draw .............and only a couple of feet from my head.............been like that for years and not lost sleep



However i like living on the edge!





Long live li ion and common sense


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> Thankfully some of the Streamlights are 100+ lumens out.
> 
> 9 lumen output in a cave I'm sure is useful for some purposes although we are spoiled here and would expect massively long runtimes for such low output.
> 
> I had an opportunity to use a small variable output 1xAA light in a decommissioned mine. It's shocking how little output is needed to go from absolutely dark to light-enough to walk around. Eyes are amazing things.



I was hitting a cave as a tourist one time and the guide stopped at one point and asked if anyone had some cool flashlights. He warned us he was about to cut the lights. All I had on me at the time was a stinking Mag Solitaire incan (this was in the late 80's) and some part of me instinctively knew that there was something better. ...something FAR better!

Even so, the super dark cave made my little pathetic sickly yellow beam seem so much better. It made me feel good at the time.

...tales of a proto-flashaholic.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> On a side note: Is there a way to identify the cells inside a laptop. To know exactly what the cell is? Maybe a chart with identifying numbers?



It depends. Sometimes there are (cryptic) markings on laptop packs that allow certain inferences, e.g. about chemistry or cell manufacturer. Lacking that, sometimes the information is contained in a MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet). 

For example, below is page 1 (of 11) from the MSDS for DynaPack Dell batteries. You can find all of Dell's MSDS's here. There are probably similar documents for other laptop and battery pack manufacturers (e.g. Simplo).

Also laptop pullers often post such information, e.g. see the table in the BLF Battery Pulls Overview Thread.


----------



## tandem (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

let me



that for you

Lenovo MSDS finder: http://www.lenovo.com/social_responsibility/us/en/Lenovo_MSDS_Finder.pdf

Sigh.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

@Tandem Right, just as I implied in the prior post. Many laptop pullers are not aware that this info is often in the MSDS. Once you give them the appropriate keywords for searching, the rest is easy.


----------



## CSSA (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

If you don't feel comfortable with using Li-Ion rechargeable batteries, don't use them. But, if you use a quality battery charger that is properly matched to the batteries you will charge with it and if you use quality protected cells and if you exercise even a modicum of common sense, you should not have a problem. To have a problem you would have to have a failures of the circuitry in both the charger and the battery. If your argument is that it isn't perfectly safe, granted. Everything in life has some risk. Read HKJ's reviews, buy quality equipment, and pay attention to what you are doing.

PS. A friend of mine was a consultant working out of town and using a high-powered Dell laptop. The battery blew while people were out for lunch, started a fire, and triggered the fire suppression system. Her popularity suffered after lunch. Not even high end laptops are completely safe.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



CSSA said:


> PS. A friend of mine was a consultant working out of town and using a high-powered Dell laptop. The battery blew while people were out for lunch, started a fire, and triggered the fire suppression system. Her popularity suffered after lunch. Not even high end laptops are completely safe.



Exactly one of my points. I'm sure it wasn't your friends fault, something failed with the laptop. With today's flashlight designs, even though accidents are rare, and the odds of an explosion are greatly reduced when you understand what you need to do, the potential that it could fail, through no fault of your own, and the nasty chemistry that could be released is enough for me to choose Ni MH driven lights over Lithium Ion until I either design my own, or one is available. 

So, I'm glad that I probed you all about the safety of Lithium Ion, or else I may have gone ahead with using them. But because of all your responses, I've made a choice I can feel more comfortable with and have decided to stay away from Lithium Ion driven flashlights for now. I'm hopeful I can find some pretty good lights in the Ni MH driven category.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 12, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



CSSA said:


> PS. A friend of mine was a consultant working out of town and using a high-powered Dell laptop. The battery blew while people were out for lunch, started a fire, and triggered the fire suppression system. Her popularity suffered after lunch. Not even high end laptops are completely safe.



I have to ask was the laptop plugged in or was it left on to discharge and it overdischarged?


----------



## tandem (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> something failed with the laptop.



Stuff happens. Even though the occurrences are on the rare side of infrequent, stuff happens more often to products with multiple li-ion cells wired in series. There are technical reasons for that as well as simple odds - more cells = more chance.

A single cell flash light system (built out of good components all around) is going to be safer than a multi-cell laptop or a multi-cell flash light.

I do work with our fire department. We've had one fatality due to lithium ion cell failure in our city in the past 5 years. It was a laptop left running on a couch; probably the air vent was blocked.

I am not at all questioning your personal decision to adopt NiMH lights over Li-ion powered lights, only the air of high dudgeon surrounding your decision. I'm curious: have you abandoned the use of laptops? Tablets? Cell phones? They all have failure histories. Will you be redesigning laptop power systems in your quest too?


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *I've concluded from reading all comments that indeed, Lithium Ion driven flashlights are not idiot proof
> *


And it would appear neither is the CPF sign up page...


----------



## xeroid (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Chicken Drumstick said:


> And it would appear neither is the CPF sign up page...



You've just proven that to be SO TRUE


----------



## xeroid (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> I am not at all questioning your personal decision to adopt NiMH lights over Li-ion powered lights, only the air of high dudgeon surrounding your decision. I'm curious: have you abandoned the use of laptops? Tablets? Cell phones? They all have failure histories. Will you be redesigning laptop power systems in your quest too?



I agree, the air of high dudgeon in the responses to my concerns made my decision that much easier. Today's laptops have greatly improved upon the safety protections designed into these units, perhaps in part because of what they have learned from previous accidents. That's not the case with Lithium Ion driven flashlights yet. No need to abandon the use of laptops today, but an extra precautionary step I've taken now, is to remove the power packs when your using a laptop as if it where a desktop computer. I've seen people use laptops in bed with both the power pack and power adapter fall asleep to their computers still running. This perhaps should be avoided.


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> I agree, the air of high dudgeon in the responses to my concerns made my decision that much easier. Today's laptops have greatly improved upon the safety protections designed into these units, perhaps in part because of what they have learned from previous accidents. That's not the case with Lithium Ion driven flashlights yet. No need to abandon the use of laptops today, but an extra precautionary step I've taken now, is to remove the power packs when your using a laptop as if it where a desktop computer. I've seen people use laptops in bed with both the power pack and power adapter fall asleep to their computers still running. This perhaps should be avoided.


Do you actually have any notion of the number of laptops and laptop owners out there vs the number that ever see an issue? Suspect we are talking 0.001% or something ludicrously small.

Maybe you'd like to try and ban the entire RC hobby area too as no LiPo battery pack uses any form of protection. And next on your list could be a movement against guns and sharp objects.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

I honestly don't think xeroid wants to ban li-ion usage.. he wants to make it safer and at this point it's not. While hobbyists can use li-ions and feel safe because they are taking the proper precautions the average joe can not. Granted we should be a little more forthcoming into what dangers there are like, don't repeatedly recharge a fully NiMH battery because there's a chance it could blow it's top off. I mean i know it's common sense there but to those who might have charged a set of batteries and forgotten about them being charged and put them back in a timer charger or worse yet alkalines and yes this has happened before lol.

I'm concerned that some people rely too much on the safety mechanisms and that's why it's nice that a few PC companies are employing far better safety standards that you can tweak so you can extend the life of your laptop battery as well. I'll have to get me one of those laptops, but first i'm going to use some unprotected Li-ions and blow them up! :fail:

No no no, i won't ever do that i'm kidding (watching too much Mythbusters here) but if i know the dangers of li-ions and treat them in a way they are not dangerous then i'm ok. Not everyone is like that though and some people would be too scared to use a volatile battery. I wonder if people were this way with lead acid batteries when they were first around, IIRC they too were volatile like li-ions at one time. The only difference is, the price point. In which case as some have mentioned it's expensive to try to employ every safety standard you can and most of the time those safety standards is just misuse or not knowing the dangers of them. It's really no different than someone taking a hammer to a li-ion battery or putting their iPhone into a boiling pot of coca-cola and not knowing what that cloud was emanating from it. Of course most sane people wouldn't do either even if they didn't know the dangers of li-ion batteries and these people who are using their laptops on their beds that could cause a fire from too much heat buildup to me is the same as mishandling an unprotected li-ion battery.

So i do understand xeriods concerns. I think there needs to be a place where people can experiment with new technology that is safe for both them and other people. Dunking your iPhone in a pot of coke and smashing your phone with a hammer hitting and causing the li-ion battery to explode in an uncontrolled environment without proper protection is just ridiculous. I don't think there's any problem in doing those things (well actually i do it's a waste of good technology, but well whatever) but do it somewhere where you and others will not be harmed.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



MidnightDistortions said:


> *Granted we should be a little more forthcoming into what dangers there are like*, don't repeatedly recharge a fully NiMH battery because there's a chance it could blow it's top off.
> 
> It's really no different than someone taking a hammer to a li-ion battery or putting their iPhone into a boiling pot of coca-cola and not knowing what that cloud was emanating from it. Of course most sane people wouldn't do either even if they didn't know the dangers of li-ion batteries and these people who are using their laptops on their beds that could cause a fire from too much heat buildup to me is the same as mishandling an unprotected li-ion battery.



Oh, in that case.... "Don't hook lithium ion batteries directly to wall current indoors ....while holding them!" :devil: The safety solution? Don't do that! 

Common sense is a scarce commodity sometimes. Unfortunately, common sense wouldn't tell you about precursors to hydroflouric.

It reminds me of when PCs were getting into the hands of the Average Joe and you hear stories about "broken cup holders." My first thought was "I can't believe someone would do that!" *George Carlin was right.*


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Chicken Drumstick said:


> And it would appear neither is the CPF sign up page...



Well done top drumming there Mr Chicken Drumstick.:thumbsup:


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



more_vampires said:


> Oh, in that case.... "Don't hook lithium ion batteries directly to wall current indoors ....while holding them!" :devil: The safety solution? Don't do that!
> 
> Common sense is a scarce commodity sometimes. Unfortunately, common sense wouldn't tell you about precursors to hydroflouric.
> 
> It reminds me of when PCs were getting into the hands of the Average Joe and you hear stories about "broken cup holders." My first thought was "I can't believe someone would do that!" *George Carlin was right.*



LOL talk about blunders - http://www.zdnet.com/article/ive-broken-my-coffee-cup-holder-and-other-tales-of-helpdesk-woe/

Also i had to quote this



> not to mention the infamous woman whose PC had cut out and failed to restart. The helpdesk worker on the end of the phone went through a comprehensive checklist - baffled by the failure. Eventually, when asked whether everything was plugged in around the back of the machine, she admitted she couldn't see too well as the office was dark. 'Why?' asked the helpdesk worker. "Because there has been a power cut" came the reply.




 seriously that article makes me facepalm every time. You got to wonder whether these people were living under a rock and suddenly sprang into this existence with no prior knowledge of today's lifestyle. I'm pretty sure somewhere out there there's some guy out there trying to charge his NiMH cells with an an electrical extension cord because he hasn't yet discovered a device that hooks into an outlet.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

 I sent you an email about the email being down. 

 Why won't this monochrome laser printer print color? 

 What's wrong with email forwarding several 12 MB files to 300 people in the workgroup? 

I spent a little time on "helldesk" myself.


----------



## MidnightDistortions (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Haha how about this one "my mouse isn't working.. it keeps running off, eating cheese and my cat won't leave it alone!!" that one though is probably a myth though. There was one guy that thought the PC monitor was the entire PC. "I clicked on the button and the computer won't turn on. I can't find where i can plug my keyboard in".

Oh sorry i think we're getting off topic here.

Li-ion batteries are dangerous.


----------



## Beamhead (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

My fav was "I can't find the any key".


----------



## tandem (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Today's laptops have greatly improved upon the safety protections designed into these units, perhaps in part because of what they have learned from previous accidents.



You keep stating such things as if they were fact but your musings always lack detail to back them up. It's clear from your prior comments on the subject that you don't have much background in this field. As this is a fact-based corner of the universe where we avoid making things up as we go along you should show sources backing up your "facts" or be clear that you are merely stating your opinion or hopeful, utopian, thoughts.



> I've seen people use laptops in bed with both the power pack and power adapter fall asleep to their computers still running.



You are watching people in bed with their laptops? That sounds uncomfortably voyeuristic at best, an illegal invasion of privacy at worst.

It's doubtful you actually meant what you said. How about we stick to facts, not made up stuff?

The facts are that properly designed cells, lights, and chargers comprise a system that is at least as safe as a properly designed battery pack, laptop, and charger.

You can deny this all you want but if you do so, stick to your one area of complaint that stands scrutiny: many flashlights are designed as sealed units.

Why? For safety.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

User Error: The biggest threat to safety in any domain, any topic, any equipment, any field.


----------



## tandem (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Beamhead said:


> My fav was "I can't find the any key".



In the early 80's my first tech job was in support. Even a mere couple of years after the birth of the PC we were fielding calls like that. Writing technical manuals for customers who often had never touched a computer before in their life was, it seems, challenging. Oh how I miss floppy disks and 5MB hard drives. Things are much better now!

My favourite: a true story from one of my colleagues in the support group of a major accounting software vendor I worked at:



> *Tech*: Insert Disk 1 and press any key to continue
> *Customer*: OK... it's loading
> *Tech*: When the screen prompts you, insert Disk 2 and continue. You'll do this again at the prompt for Disk 3.
> *Customer*: OK
> ...


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> You [xeroid=OP] keep stating such things as if they were fact but your musings always lack detail to back them up. [...]
> As this is a fact-based corner of the universe where we avoid making things up as we go along you should show sources backing up your "facts" or be clear that you are merely stating your opinion or hopeful, utopian, thoughts. [...]
> The facts are that properly designed cells, lights, and chargers comprise a system that is at least as safe as a properly designed battery pack, laptop, and charger.



First, you just engaged in the precise form of argument that you critiqued, viz. you wrote "The facts are..." without giving any support for that claim. Second your claim that "this is a fact based corner of the universe" also lacks support. In fact, I'd disagree with that - most arguments here are based solely on opinion - not hard science. Third, how do you propose to _prove _your (highly dubious) claim that "properly designed cells, lights, and chargers comprise a system that is at least as safe as a properly designed battery pack, laptop, and charger". I doubt you'd find even a single expert who would agree with that (but they would probably agree that it is _possible _to design such a flashlight system).


----------



## Grizzman (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> The facts are that properly designed cells, lights, and chargers comprise a system that is at least as safe as a properly designed battery pack, laptop, and charger.



AW, Keeppower, Nitecore, Orbtronic, etc protected Li-Ion cells have protection circuits to eliminate over charging the cells. They also shut down the cell when voltage has reached a pre-determined minimum level. Eagletac, Foursevens, HDS, Oveready, etc lights have protection circuits that shut off the light once the cell reaches a pre-determined low voltage level. Pila, Xtar, etc chargers have electronics that monitor the charge rate, voltage and temperature of the cells (and charger) during the charging cycle.

Are these "systems" equally as safe as a laptop? I highly doubt the experiment has been conducted to verify or discount this. As has already been stated, the proper use of flashlights is no more dangerous than driving a car, riding a bicycle in traffic, or taking a shower.




Gauss163 said:


> First, you just engaged in the precise form of argument that you critiqued, viz. you wrote "The facts are..." without giving any support for that claim.



The protection systems employed in cells, chargers, and lights have been stated again, and again, and again by me. Are you actually reading and comprehending what is being said?

There are over 7,000 active CPF users, and it's reasonable to believe that the vast majority of them use flashlights on a regular basis. There's an area in the Flashlight Electronics section devoted to the dangers of batteries. http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?107-Smoke-and-Fire-Hot-Cells-and-Close-Calls-The-dangerous-side-of-batteries

If flashlights were truly dangerous, then I'd presume that there would be many threads started by CPF users describing the close calls and catastrophes they've experienced. These threads don't exist for a reason.

Nobody here is forcing anybody to use technology that makes them uncomfortable. I am not going to post in this thread again.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Grizzman said:


> AW, Keeppower, Nitecore, Orbtronic, etc protected Li-Ion cells have protection circuits to eliminate over charging the cells. They also shut down the cell when voltage has reached a pre-determined minimum level. Eagletac, Foursevens, HDS, Oveready, etc lights have protection circuits that shut off the light once the cell reaches a pre-determined low voltage level. Pila, Xtar, etc chargers have electronics that monitor the charge rate, voltage and temperature of the cells (and charger) during the charging cycle.
> [...] The protection systems employed in cells, chargers, and lights have been stated again, and again, and again by me. Are you actually reading and comprehending what is being said?



Laptop batteries from reputable manufacturers are designed to meet very strict, comprehensive standards composed by leading experts (e.g. IEEE 1625, 93pp.) The specs require _multiple levels of fault-redundant_ protection, including _several independent _circuits that protect against overvoltage, overcurrent, overtemperature, etc.

For example, to protect against overcharge there are at least two independent circuits monitoring each cell's voltage. Each IC has the capability to turn off the charge MOSFET and, if that fails (e.g. FET failed short), they can then blow a special type of fuse (chemical / 3-terminal) to disconnect the cells. Such fuses require only a small voltage on a 3rd terminal to trigger a disconnect. Because it requires only a small voltage to blow, it can function even when the battery voltage has dropped very low (e.g. due to a short-circuit). Analogous redundancy exists for other protection mechanisms (overcurrent, overtemperature, etc).

The probability of safety failure of a laptop battery is greatly reduced due to these multiple levels of redundant protection. By contrast, there is significantly less protection provided by protected cells and standalone chargers. Protected cells can fail simply from static shock (ESD), mechanical shock (drops), etc. Indeed, there are many reports here and on BLF of failed protection circuits on cells. Standalone chargers typically have little if any _redundant _protection, and are not designed to meet any reputable international standards.


----------



## tandem (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Some of the protections you describe in laptop circuits have their equivalent in a single li-ion cell flashlight. Some of the protections you describe, necessary in laptop battery circuits, are not required for a single cell flash light.

Slight tangent: I figured eventually the e-cigarette market would prove to be a useful source of li-ion risk and safety information as the market for e-cigarette users is many orders of magnitude larger than the flash light aficionado market and is growing at an amazing rate. Not all the vendors in the space are reputable and safety concious, to put it politely. Finally in 2014 a report on e-cig / li-ion safety issues was published - by FEMA in the U.S. - worth reading: https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/electronic_cigarettes.pdf

Unfortunately there aren't granular fire statistics available that would allow researchers to properly attribute all li-ion use adverse outcomes in these consumer products, but what they were able to do was collect some information by scanning media reports. Sadly the report's conclusions are in part wrong, or at best, incomplete.

Colour me unsurprised that the vast majority of issues were reported as a result of a charging operation. This could be as a result of bad cells or improperly implemented + built chargers, or both. 

Back to the supposedly_ uber-redundant_ laptops which continue to catch fire and explode. Here's a handful of stories from 2014:

Before one cites the number of laptops in the world. consider two laptop fires in six weeks in relatively tiny Prince Edward Island:


http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/laptop-on-clothes-started-house-fire-1.1336833
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/princ...ed-laptop-in-bed-causes-duplex-fire-1.1336831

HP: http://www.nbcwashington.com/news/l...to-Fires-Safety-Officials-Warn-214839591.html

I'm personally aware of a fatality (2009) in my own city due to some poor fellow falling asleep with his laptop on a comfy couch.

Apparently there *aren't* redundant temperature sensors in these laptops. Let's see the circuits in popular laptops before assuming they are all full of redundant safety features. 

*Some product recalls in 2014*:



Lenovo: Recalls 544 thousand non-redundant power cords http://venturebeat.com/2014/12/09/lenovo-recalls-544k-laptop-power-cords-over-fire-and-burn-hazards/


HP: Recalls 6 million non-redundant power cords http://www.pcworld.com/article/2599...ords-that-can-pose-fire-and-burn-hazards.html
Lenovo: Recalls tens of thousands of various battery packs (mine wasn't one of them) http://support.lenovo.com/ca/en/documents/hf004122
Sony: Recalls 25,000 Vaio Fit 11A models due to risk of battery-induced fire
Panasonic: Even one of the best makers of cells sometimes has issues. http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/...battery-packs.html?cmp_id=7&news_id=222921259


Owners of name brand laptops that feed their laptops the right OEM (not counterfeit) battery packs stand a chance at receiving a recall notice. Still, millions of consumers the world over are inviting, blissfully unaware, untested, possibly dangerous and almost certainly un-supported and un-supervised products. You won't see PantsOnFire Battery Company issuing a recall notice for your Toshiba laptop "replacement" pack. Indeed, these things show up in the news frequently:

*Persons being injured or killed by counterfeit or poorly made replacement parts*
http://www.businessinsider.com/woman-burned-by-exploding-dell-laptop-2014-7
One single school has two laptop fires, likely source is "generic" (counterfeit / badly made) packs. Buying 1,100 packs, twice, is false economy they learn.
http://wishtv.com/2014/11/06/school-removes-1100-batteries-after-2-laptop-fires/


*Of course, operators / users are often to blame for their own misfortune*:

Owners/users are often their worst enemy, putting themselves and elevated risk by buying the cheapest product (laptop or flashlight) or cheap power source (non-OEM replacement "deal" battery pack or PantsOnFire deal of the day "protected" cell) or cheap/unknown charger (non-OEM phone/laptop/tablet chargers, USB wall warts of all sorts, or unproven/untested single cell li-ion chargers).

Finally, not even dogs can be trusted to operate stoves and electronics properly:
Dog turns on stove, which catches laptop resting on burner on fire and sends smoke out roof
http://www.news1130.com/2014/08/30/...g-on-burner-on-fire-and-sends-smoke-out-roof/

Back to the topic at hand, I'll say it again - if a would-be light user is willing to be their own systems integrator, it is possible to put together a safe li-ion powered light _system_ using off the shelf known-good components. The single-cell li-ion light built with known-good components can be statistically proven to be safer than a multi-cell CR123 _primary non-rechargeable_ powered light. The one advantage a lithium _primary cell_ powered light has over it's li-ion powered cousins is there is no recharging operation to fail.


----------



## tandem (Jan 13, 2015)

*Be your own system integrator and breath easier*

A traditional "consumer" who buys a product must do so with blind (and misplaced) faith that some uber-authority is checking every single electronics design and implementation that ultimately makes its way to store shelves or an on-line shopping cart. This simply isn't the case in any jurisdiction on the planet. 

Time and again we've seen examples of designs that ostensibly should be living up to rigorous product safety standards... fail. Whether it's laptops or B777 and B787 li-ion power cell implementations - substandard designs and products _do_ make their way into consumer hands or service no matter what an IEEE standard from 2006 might wish for otherwise.

At least an informed buyer here can extract from CPF the information required to acquire tested products that have stood the test of time.

I've said it before and will say it again: I'm not aware of _any_ known-good flashlight, powered by a known-good li-ion cell, charged by a known-good charger, that has resulted in a dangerous outcome.

Conversely we've seen lots of junk explode or fail with potentially dangerous consequences. Fortunately we have plenty of sane voices here exhorting newcomers to avoid such crap.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 13, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> [...] Finally, not even dogs can be trusted to operate stoves and electronics properly:
> Dog turns on stove, which catches laptop resting on burner on fire and sends smoke out roof



Laptop battery system designers are way ahead of you - even in the older IEEE 1625 standard of 2004 they considered device usage by pets - see the Use situation number 96 below "Pet urinates on PC". Though there are no known standalone chargers that test for this, rumor has it that the new SkyRC MC3000 "DreamCharger" has that too ("Excited squirrel urinates on the DreamCharger").


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 14, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> Laptop battery system designers are way ahead of you - even in the older IEEE 1625 standard of 2004 they considered *device usage by pets* - see the Use situation number 96 below "*Pet urinates on PC*". Though there are no known standalone chargers that test for this, rumor has it that the new SkyRC MC3000 "DreamCharger" has that too ("*Excited squirrel urinates on the DreamCharger*").




...and THIS is what happens when you've got millions of devices in the wild.

Great posts, everyone. Loving this info stream!


----------



## tandem (Jan 14, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> Laptop battery system designers are way ahead of you - even in the older IEEE 1625 standard of 2004 they considered device usage by pets - see the Use situation number 96 below "Pet urinates on PC". Though there are no known standalone chargers that test for this, rumor has it that the new SkyRC MC3000 "DreamCharger" has that too ("Excited squirrel urinates on the DreamCharger").



LOL.

Sadly, in this world of pets and urination, IEEE standards are purely voluntary. Such is the case for the design and implementation of laptop computer equipment, charging circuit, and battery packs.

What about mandatory national standards? You'll find no mention of pets or urination in IEC/UL 60950! NEMA? Forget about it. UL 1642 + UL 2054 ought to have urination in its safety testing regime, but, alas, fails to incorporate this important household risk.

Every day I look at my dog with a mixture of love and fear. Trepidation over canine emissions has resulted in a positive outcome however, I'm about to launch a new business venture: LaptopCondom.com. Never fear your pet (or toddler) again!


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Perhaps the OP isn't as paranoid as some have suggested:

http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?396117-Solarforce-Explosion


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

It feels like watching a car wreck. Nothing anyone can do.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Ehhh...isolated incident. How many people choked to death on a ham sandwich yesterday?

I hope he fully recovers.

What do we say about running naked li-ions in series?

Chris


----------



## tandem (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

It's good to be safety cautious, but not good to be paranoid. Identifying risks and mitigating them can't be done if paranoia causes one to dwell on some aspects of the problem domain without due consideration to all the issues. 

Somewhere up thread I pointed out that stories of lithium power related flash light failures / damage / injury have historically revolved around multi-cell light configurations. Today's sad news is likely yet another such story, but more investigation needs to be done to understand what happen. 

Nevertheless, based on accidents of the past, the implication is one can eliminate the most common in-light failure scenario by not purchasing multi-cell lithium powered light configurations. 

When I first started out with hi-output LED lights I bought only AA NiMH powered lights myself until I felt comfortable with lithium-ion technology. The formula for low-risk, regular use lights that meets my "Mr. Safety" nature is:

- single cell lights
- known good chargers
- known good lights
- known good cells

Mapping that criteria against today's unfortunate news:

1) It was a multi-cell light = increased risk opportunity
2) The user knew the light had thread issues (speaks to quality of the light);
3) There are a wide variety of quality reports on Tenergy LiFeO4 cells as sold by a variety of resellers; For a chilling read, check various Amazon.com reviews. You'll see many reporting receiving one or more cells that fail to hold a charge out of the package or shortly after going into service. If a bad cell and good cell made it into the light, it becomes easy to fathom how a venting failure could occur. 
4) Charger quality (or even suitability for the specific cells) is as of now still unknown

There's much to be learned before we can come to a conclusion about today's sad story but, again, here is a multi-cell light that has failed and unfortunately resulted in injury. 

If one wants to be cautious, but still wants to enjoy some of the benefits of lithium power, avoiding multi-cell lithium (primary or rechargeable secondary) lights is the place to start.


----------



## tnek13 (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Thanks to all that posted I learned a lot. Buy quality, known products from reputable dealers and follow reasonable, sound, safe practices practices.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 15, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tnek13 said:


> Thanks to all that posted I learned a lot. Buy quality, known products from reputable dealers and follow reasonable, sound, safe practices practices.



That's pretty much it. I guess that I learned early on that it's better to be overly cautious with this stuff, just for the sake of noobs, but once you start fiddling, if you're even remotely paying attention to things, they can be pretty 'safe.'

Notwithstanding the guy that had his light blow up in his mouth.

Chris


----------



## magellan (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> Thankfully some of the Streamlights are 100+ lumens out.
> 
> 9 lumen output in a cave I'm sure is useful for some purposes although we are spoiled here and would expect massively long runtimes for such low output.
> 
> I had an opportunity to use a small variable output 1xAA light in a decommissioned mine. It's shocking how little output is needed to go from absolutely dark to light-enough to walk around. Eyes are amazing things.



Right you are. The human eye is a lot more sensitive than people think. The human eye is thousands of times more sensitive than ASA400 film and can detect the light from a lit cigaret 20 miles away on a moonless night. That means only 2 or 3 photons are hitting the retina.


----------



## Chicken Drumstick (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tnek13 said:


> Thanks to all that posted I learned a lot. Buy quality, known products from reputable dealers and follow reasonable, sound, safe practices practices.


Mostly yes. But I think the biggest thing is to become an 'informed' buyer, rather than an ignorant one.

Cheap does not always means rubbish, and conversely expensive does not always mean good.

Know what you are buying and importantly why you are buying it.


----------



## Poppy (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> A laptop battery contains cells in series, this means that the circuit must also include a balancing circuit (At least if they want long lifetime from the battery). With flashlights you usual take the batteries out to charge and do not need the balancing circuit.
> 
> Laptop batteries do also contain a communication channel, where the computer can ask for status and check that the battery pack is the correct brand, this is not really necessary for protection.


Geez, I can't believe that I read most of *this trolling thread.
*
HKJ,
I am glad that you made these points :thumbsup: as I believe they are KEY!




ChrisGarrett said:


> What do we say about running naked li-ions in series?
> 
> Chris


I won't run "naked" Li-ions in series.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Poppy said:


> Geez, I can't believe that I read most of *this trolling thread.
> *
> HKJ,
> I am glad that you made these points :thumbsup: as I believe they are KEY!
> ...




Many realised it was trolling ages ago.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> Many realised it was trolling ages ago.



Maybe, maybe not. It's not an obvious troll like someone putting "use alkalines for top performance" in their signature. And, recent events in the sub-forum is a reminder that lithiums in flashlights can be very dangerous.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Maybe, maybe not. It's not an obvious troll like someone putting "use alkalines for top performance" in their signature. And, recent events in the sub-forum is a reminder that lithiums in flashlights can be very dangerous.



My signature is my belief and certainly not trolling and imo lithium's in flashlight,s are not at all dangerous and far from it.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



mcnair55 said:


> My signature is my belief and certainly not trolling and imo lithium's in flashlight,s are not at all dangerous and far from it.



In all seriousness, you should really add 'in TV remotes and wall clocks.' to your sig-line.

We could all get behind you on that one.

Chris


----------



## xeroid (Jan 16, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> Perhaps the OP isn't as paranoid as some have suggested:
> 
> http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?396117-Solarforce-Explosion



The OP is being smart and cautious. Lithium in sealed flashlights is not the safest choice. 

No matter what the cause, it is still an accident and not something the operator planned on happening. Even if a thread was stripped off and a small piece of aluminum caused a short, (_this being only speculation from someone_) I would still not blame the operator. I would blame this on poor flashlight design. Grounds can be isolated and do not have to be part of the entire flashlight casing. We know this much so far. He used Tenergy Batteries in good condition and a Tenergy Charger (_well known brand in the hobby world_) and was using a sealed Solarforce Lt2 flashlight. It blew up unexpectedly.


----------



## tandem (Jan 17, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> We know this much so far. He used Tenergy Batteries in good condition and a Tenergy Charger (_well known brand in the hobby world_) and was using a sealed Solarforce Lt2 flashlight. It blew up unexpectedly.



Yes, a SolarForce L2T light "blew up unexpectedly". That much is certain, but very little else is certain other than SubAlpine has suffered injury and expense as a result of what happened.

We don't know anything about the pedigree of the Tenergy cells or charger purchased by SubAlpine. What does "good condition" mean? We can simply presume they are legitimate, but that would be a mistake for without examination we can't know that for sure. Counterfeit cells and chargers are a known problem, which is why some of us have been asking about the _source _of the components.

(_For an example of just how bad the counterfeit problem can be, visit the YouTube video in my sig to witness a commonly sold "brand" name cell discovered to be full of flour. Yes, flour._)

What state the cells were in when they arrived on the doorstep is unknown. Were they legit? Unknown. Were they well matched? Unknown. Were they matched when they went into the light? Unknown. Were they tested for voltage by the user after they came out of the charger? Unknown. If so, what were those readings? If not, then we will never know for certain what the state of the 2 cells in that light were and that constitutes a big gap in the fact stream.

Does the user have spare cells from the same order? If so let's examine those, and the charger, and the source of both. Then and only then will we be able to comment on whether the cells and charger were in good order and appropriate for the task.


----------



## ChrisGarrett (Jan 17, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

I'm sorry that he got hurt, but his situation doesn't effect my decision to run li-ions cells in my lights, until the cows come home.

How many people accidentally shoot themselves with a gun?

A freakin' lot more than people blowing themselves up with li-ion cells in their flashlights, I'll wager? Yet I still own weapons.

To all the nervous Nellies out there, stick to NiMH, or alkaleaks, if you're afraid.

We 'thrill-seekers' will continue on doing what we're doing.

Chris


----------



## xeroid (Jan 17, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> Yes, a SolarForce L2T light "blew up unexpectedly". That much is certain, but very little else is certain other than SubAlpine has suffered injury and expense as a result of what happened.
> 
> We don't know anything about the pedigree of the Tenergy cells or charger purchased by SubAlpine. What does "good condition" mean? We can simply presume they are legitimate, but that would be a mistake for without examination we can't know that for sure. Counterfeit cells and chargers are a known problem, which is why some of us have been asking about the _source _of the components.
> 
> ...



Let's not suspect any issues with the flashlight or it's design, the light that uses the entire casing as a ground, the light that has no venting to release pressure when it needs to.


----------



## tandem (Jan 17, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Let's not suspect any issues with the flashlight or it's design, the light that uses the entire casing as a ground, the light that has no venting to release pressure when it needs to.



I'm guessing that was supposed to be sarcasm. In response I'm going to point out that chassis of my truck is at ground potential but that doesn't trouble me. I carry two litres of white gasoline in a tightly sealed metal container in my backpack when I head out into the mountains for a week or more and that doesn't trouble me either. Whether these are issues in flash light design need to be looked at in context.

What troubles me are counterfeit cells, or old cells re-wrapped and sold as new, or cells of questionable manufacture, or cells full of flour containing a tiny cell 1/40th of the claimed capacity or counterfeit chargers or bad charger designs that are dangerous on first use. What troubles me are elements of flash light design that invite trouble such as exposing circuits to debris entering via the cell tube or poorly fitting threads that shear off aluminium bits into the tube or head where exposed circuits sit. 

These sorts of issues trouble me more than flash lights designed to be water tight (for safety). Statistics back me up - we aren't seeing good quality light + cell + charger combos blowing up. 

Where there are issues, one or more of those components were compromised. 

It may be that a pressure relief valve in flash lights would reduce the impact of a cell failure (or charger-induced cell failure), but such a device wouldn't eliminate all the problems. If a lithium ion cell is venting with flame within a flash light that has a relief valve it very likely will be venting with flame through that valve and still burn down your home. If a CR123 primary cell is venting poisonous hydroflouric acid vapour, that's still a dangerous health hazard and clean up issue. If a bad cell + charger combination (charging is where many problems originate) erupts in flames, who cares if the currently-empty flash light on the shelf nearby is a sealed vessel?

Focus on one issue - "flash light design" and you'll miss the bigger, root, problems - and will be no farther ahead.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

*Focus on one issue - "flash light design" and you'll miss the bigger, root, problems - and will be no farther ahead.*

My point was that the majority here tend to focus on anything but flashlight design, and because of this you may be missing the big picture. 

It's pretty much accepted that lithium cells can be dangerous, no matter the reason, if they're fakes, hard to charge properly or the charging units themselves, it doesn't really matter. That's the way it is. 

If accounting for all these shortfalls, knowing they do exist, within the design of the flashlight, many of these accidents could be avoided. Short of testing your batteries every 10 seconds yourself when using them in a flashlight, your just playing Russian Roulette, when it could be so much easier to have the flashlight monitor for all these potential hazards every second, full time and shut down when necessary. Also a way for flashlights to vent from the sealed battery containers when necessary. It's not expensive to monitor for these potential shortfalls, and likely only one IC. Check out the chip makers like Texas Instruments who make these chips for this very purpose.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Short of testing your batteries every 30 or 60 seconds yourself when using them in a flashlight, your just playing Russian Roulette, when it could be so much easier to have the flashlight monitor for all these potential hazards every second, full time.



LiIon batteries are not that dangerous and you would not gain much by monitoring the batteries.
The only major shortcoming is that most flashlights are missing a proper vent path, but luckily it is very seldom a problem.



xeroid said:


> It's not expensive and likely only one IC. Check out the chip makers like Texas Instruments who make these chips for this very purpose.



And that IC is often mounted on the battery, i.e. protected battery.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

*And that IC is often mounted on the battery, i.e. protected battery. *

This is totally incorrect. Different IC. It's purpose is in protecting the life of the battery, and not protecting the user from potential explosions. 

*LiIon batteries are not that dangerous and you would not gain much by monitoring the batteries.*

This is also totally incorrect.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *And that IC is often mounted on the battery, i.e. protected battery. *
> 
> This is totally incorrect. It's purpose is in protecting the life of the battery, and not protecting the user from potential explosions.



Tht is basically the same, as long as the battery is protected, there is no risk of explosion (Except with a faulty battery and no IC can protect you from that).



xeroid said:


> *LiIon batteries are not that dangerous and you would not gain much by monitoring the batteries.*
> This is also totally incorrect.



Why do you believe that, please supply some explanation.

As long as a LiIon battery is kept within the specified voltage, current and temperature range, it is safe. The protection IC on the battery will handle the first two.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

IMO, a pressure-release valve would be a good idea for lithium-ion lights. It wouldn't solve the fire issue, but it would solve the "grenade" issue. I don't think it should be mandatory, but for someone wanting to pay a little more for the option, why not include it on high-end lights? It could be a good feature, especially on multi-cell lithium-ion lights.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

*And that IC is often mounted on the battery, i.e. protected battery. *

This is totally incorrect. It's purpose is in protecting the life of the battery, and not protecting the user from potential explosions.


*That is basically the same, as long as the battery is protected, there is no risk of explosion (Except with a faulty battery and no IC can protect you from that).*

Incorrect again! Yes, in most cases, a battery explosion would point to something going wrong with the battery or use of the battery. A monitoring circuit could monitor for the slightest short, temperature changes, pressure changes, or anything else deemed necessary. Protecting the life of the battery, ("_protected battery_") and protecting the user from potential explosions are two different things. As long as the battery is being monitored full time for any risk of explosions under the conditions it is being used, there would be a substantial reduced risk of explosion. This should be part of a well designed flashlight. An isolated ground, pressure release and rigorous monitoring would make for today's safest flashlight. I'm sure there would be no shortage of buyers. 
*



LiIon batteries are not that dangerous and you would not gain much by monitoring the batteries.
* 
This is also totally incorrect.


*Why do you believe that, please supply some explanation.*

Explanation is above.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *That is basically the same, as long as the battery is protected, there is no risk of explosion (Except with a faulty battery and no IC can protect you from that).*
> 
> Incorrect again! Yes, in most cases, a battery explosion would point to something going wrong with the battery or use of the battery. A monitoring circuit could monitor for the slightest short, temperature changes, pressure changes, or anything else deemed necessary. Protecting the life of the battery, ("_protected battery_") and protecting the user from potential explosions are two different things. As long as the battery is being monitored full time for any risk of explosions under the conditions it is being used, there would be a substantial reduced risk of explosion. This should be part of a well designed flashlight. An isolated ground, pressure release and rigorous monitoring would make for today's safest flashlight. I'm sure there would be no shortage of buyers.



What is the "slightest short", is that when the light uses some current?
"temperature changes" like when taking the light outdoors?
"pressure changes", they are not coming from a sealed battery, i.e. they must be coming from the surrounding. 
"anything else deemed necessary" I wonder

I cannot see how any of the above would reduce the risk of a battery explosion.


----------



## tandem (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> *Focus on one issue - "flash light design" and you'll miss the bigger, root, problems - and will be no farther ahead.*
> 
> My point was that the majority here tend to focus on anything but flashlight design, and because of this you may be missing the big picture.
> 
> ...



What *some people* do is play Russian Roulette, but certainly not all lithium powered flash light users play such games. Those that insist on buying crap cells from questionable sources are much more likely to be involved in an adverse incident than someone that buys good cells and good chargers from well known reliable sources.

Your *Nirvana Flash Light *(tm) (R pending) festooned with protective ICs still may blow up spectacularly through some failure modes if the user still has control over providing the cells and charging process. I would hope you aren't figuring on building an electronics-protected light that can account for all the dangerous crap being sold out there for cells and charging - that's a fool's errand.

The only way forward to developing your Nirvana Flash Light (tm) is for a company to be 100% responsible for the design and implementation of all components, from power source to light. Indeed, there are already some lithium powered lights available from well known makers and these probably go 90% of the way to your goal, but chances are they are still sealed. See if Pelican has one, they put in a pressure relief valve in some lights if I recall correctly. Buy one.

Better yet, don't buy any lithium powered lights for yourself. Buy a 1xAA NiMH powered light, sealed or not, because that's going to be the safest possible light for you... far safer than stumbling around in the dark when you really need a light but don't have one because you are fearful it will explode on you.

In the meantime, the failure possibility of a 1x lithium powered light of good design fed with a cell from a trustworthy source and charged with a reliable charger is so close to zero that we really are wasting our time talking about it.


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Common sense is all that is needed to operate Li-ON safely,this is a trolling post and nothing more.


----------



## tandem (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Protecting the life of the battery, ("_protected battery_") and protecting the user from potential explosions are two different things.



They are _not "_two different things".

You've a lot to learn. Despite people here attempting to help you attain that knowledge, you are showing that you can't assimilate it.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Tandem, that link in your sig makes me want to buy a plane ticket and punch someone. It's like the time I got some brake pads made of compressed grass. They lasted less than a minute and scarred the crap out of my rotors.

Overseas sellers do this in a heart beat because they feel there are no repercussions to their fraud and crime. Sadly, the FBI has better things to do than go after counterfeit batteries and brake pads in China. Were they a US company, they'd have had their backs to the wall.

Above all, if you don't NEED unprotected cells... don't USE unprotected cells. It's like barebacking an IV-using hemophiliac hooker. It's going to burn one day. Use a condom.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> In the meantime, the failure possibility of a 1x lithium powered light of good design fed with a cell from a trustworthy source and charged with a reliable charger is so close to zero that we really are wasting our time talking about it.



This is simply a _personal opinion_, without any supplied hard facts or science to back it up. Moreover, it is meaningless without precise definitions of the terms "trustworthy", "reliable" and without any specified methods of certifying such. And what is "close to zero", 5%? 1%? and what statistics back-up these claims?


----------



## xeroid (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

They are two different things.

Again, a protected battery with a chip integrated inside is designed more to ensure the battery has the longest life possible. In contrast let's look at a CHIP that is more designed to protect against potential failures.

[h=2]Description[/h] 
The bq40z50 device, incorporating patented Impedance Track™
technology, is a fully integrated, single-chip, pack-based solution that 
provides a rich array of features for gas gauging, protection, and 
authentication for	1-series, 2-series, 3-series, and 
4-series cell Li-Ion and Li-Polymer battery packs.


Using its integrated high-performance analog peripherals, the bq40z50 
device measures and maintains an accurate record of available capacity, 
voltage, current, temperature, and other	critical parameters in Li-Ion or 
Li-Polymer batteries, and reports this information to the system host 
controller over an SMBus v1.1 compatible interface.


The bq40z50 device supports TURBO BOOST mode by providing the 
available max power and max current to the host system. The device 
also supports Battery Trip Point to send a BTP interrupt signal to the 
host system at the pre-set state of charge thresholds.


The bq40z50 provides software-based 1st- and 2nd-level safety protection 
against overvoltage, undervoltage, overcurrent, short-circuit current, overload, 
and overtemperature conditions, as well as other pack- and cell-related faults.


SHA-1 authentication, with secure memory for authentication keys, enables 
identification of genuine battery packs.


The compact 32-lead QFN package minimizes solution cost and size for smart 
batteries while providing maximum functionality and safety for battery 
gauging applications.


[h=2]Features[/h] 


Fully Integrated 1-Series, 2-Series, 3-Series, and 
4-Series Li-Ion or Li-Polymer Cell Battery Pack 
Manager and Protection
Next-Generation Patented Impedance Track™ 
Technology Accurately Measures Available 
Charge in	Li-Ion and Li-Polymer Batteries
High Side N-CH Protection FET Drive
Integrated Cell Balancing While Charging or At 
Rest
Full Array of Programmable Protection Features
Voltage
Current
Temperature
Charge Timeout
CHG/DSG	FETs
AFE

Sophisticated Charge Algorithms
JEITA
Enhanced Charging
Adaptive Charging
Cell Balancing

Supports TURBO BOOST Mode
Supports Battery Trip Point (BTP)
Diagnostic Lifetime Data Monitor and Black Box 
Recorder
LED Display
Supports Two-Wire SMBus v1.1 Interface
SHA-1 Authentication
Compact Package: 32-Lead QFN (RSM)


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> bq40z50
> 
> Supports Two-Wire SMBus v1.1 Interface
> SHA-1 Authentication
> Compact Package: 32-Lead QFN (RSM)



Now we are back to laptop and other computer equipment battery packs again.
Even without looking I am sure that my cordless drill is without this type of controller.
The chip has a few more protection features than the chip in protected batteries, this is mostly temperature and then it will check charging that it is within allowable parameters. It can also be programmed to disable the battery pack permanently on a couple of conditions.

The chip is supposed to be mounted on the battery and has a very interesting feature called authentication, designed to prevent usage of anything but authorised batteries.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> The chip has a few more protection features than the chip in protected batteries, this is mostly temperature and then it will check charging that it is within allowable parameters. It can also be programmed to disable the battery pack permanently on a couple of conditions.
> 
> The chip is supposed to be mounted on the battery and has a very interesting feature called authentication, designed to prevent usage of anything but authorised batteries.



I very much doubt it's using some of kind digital signature to prevent fraud. Anyone can likely fake the ID of the batteries, even if that's as simple as duplicating a known ID.

I'd rather the tool itself have the smarts to detect problems with a battery based on behavioural information (battery operating out of spec.), rather than depend on a authorization which could be easily faked.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I very much doubt it's using some of kind digital signature to prevent fraud. Anyone can likely fake the ID of the batteries, even if that's as simple as duplicating a known ID.



It is using the SHA-1 hash function for it, it has a 128 bit key.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> I very much doubt it's using some of kind digital signature to prevent fraud. Anyone can likely fake the ID of the batteries, even if that's as simple as duplicating a known ID.



Said TI chip implements authentication based on SHA-1.Though there are some known ways to attack SHA-1, it is unlikely that a battery cloner would spend the time and money to do so. In any case what matters is that if a laptop manufacturer desires to prevent use of counterfeit batteries then they can effectively do so using off the shelf solutions provided by reputable BMS providers.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> It is using the SHA-1 hash function for it, it has a 128 bit key.



But what are they encrypting, or signing? Someone could just take an ID (already encrypted or signed) from a known good battery, and use it on their fake battery.


----------



## HKJ (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> But what are they encrypting, or signing? Someone could just take an ID (already encrypted or signed) from a known good battery, and use it on their fake battery.



The ID is not accessible, the laptop sends a random message, this is then processed in the chip and a answer is returned. The laptop will do the same calculations on the random bits and they must match. These calculations does include the ID and they must both know the same ID to get matching result.


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

HKJ sounds like he is describing "public/private key encryption." It's all fine until the private key(s) get reverse engineered. If it's in the device, it can be extracted.

All it'll take is an oscilloscope and time.


----------



## WalkIntoTheLight (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



HKJ said:


> The ID is not accessible, the laptop sends a random message, this is then processed in the chip and a answer is returned. The laptop will do the same calculations on the random bits and they must match. These calculations does include the ID and they must both know the same ID to get matching result.



Ah, okay. That's more secure than I thought they'd try. I guess they could reuse chips from old batteries, but that's probably not worth it.

The cynic in me thinks the manufacturers are doing this more to force you to buy their overpriced replacement batteries instead of generic replacements, than they care about safety, but whatever. (I have an ink-jet printer that doesn't allow refills because the chip on the cartridge won't allow it, and that's certainly not for safety, but I digress.)


----------



## more_vampires (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The cynic in me thinks the manufacturers are doing this more to force you to buy their overpriced replacement batteries instead of generic replacements, than they care about safety, but whatever. (I have an ink-jet printer that doesn't allow refills because the chip on the cartridge won't allow it, and that's certainly not for safety, but I digress.)



Nailed it, sir. I think you're spot-on for what WILL happen. Sucks.

In addition, their "security" is not. There is no true random in hardware, except for dedicated hardware random number generators. It'll be pseudo-random (math based) at best.

It *will* get cracked. The keys *will* fall.


----------



## tandem (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> This is simply a _personal opinion_, without any supplied hard facts or science to back it up. Moreover, it is meaningless without precise definitions of the terms "trustworthy", "reliable" and without any specified methods of certifying such. And what is "close to zero", 5%? 1%? and what statistics back-up these claims?



Find me an instance of a light / cell / charger combo that meets _my_ criteria that has dangerously failed and _then we can talk_.

Moreover your objections to my characterizations are meaningless. 

No light / cell / charger combo that meets my simply defined criteria has been known to explode. Believe me, I / we would know about it if one had.

Knock yourself out trying to find an example but at this point ZERO is not a meaningless number, it's a _very meaningful number_.


----------



## tandem (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



Gauss163 said:


> Said TI chip implements authentication based on SHA-1.Though there are some known ways to attack SHA-1, *it is unlikely that a battery cloner would spend the time and money to do so.*



Emphasis mine.

Why you'd consider this _unlikely _I can't fathom because so-called secure battery systems for Nikon and other products have _already_ been broken.

A battery pack cloner has their own economic self interest in mind first and foremost. If the market for packs for a certain brand is large enough, the costs to break the key are not so great as to dissuade them from doing the work. Proof exists as it's already been done.

SHA-1 was cracked more than 7 years ago. A motivated party doesn't need to maintain the skills in house, there are plenty of low-budget places to farm out such work.


----------



## tandem (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



WalkIntoTheLight said:


> The cynic in me thinks the manufacturers are doing this more to force you to buy their overpriced replacement batteries instead of generic replacements, than they care about safety, but whatever.



Camera and laptop batteries catching on fire are bad for business; it almost doesn't matter if the packs involved are OEM or made by FlyByNight BatteriesOnFire Inc. so I can see why large brands would adopt schemes to attempt to lock buyers in. I prefer to see the lock-in attempts as a responsible means to protect their customers.

That said, I do think major vendors are their own worst enemies though. A few mark their replacement packs up so high that the pricing scheme actively encourages consumers to look for alternatives.

It probably won't surprise anyone that I have nothing but Nikon packs for my Nikon and Sony packs for my Sony. I do not trust the third party camera pack (or charger) market.


----------



## xeroid (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*

Just to bring us all back on topic ......

It's pretty much known that lithium cells can be dangerous, no matter the reason, if they're fakes, a bad one slipped through a reputable battery manufacturer, hard to charge properly or the charging units themselves, it doesn't really matter. It's in the nature of Lithium Ion battery chemistry. That's the way it is. 

Until flashlight designers take safety into full account, these flashlights will always have the potential to explode. To believe this can never happen to you because you do this or that, isn't logical.


----------



## Gauss163 (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



tandem said:


> Proof exists as it's already been done.



Where is your claimed proof of this for laptops?


----------



## mcnair55 (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Just to bring us all back on topic ......
> 
> It's pretty much known that lithium cells can be dangerous, no matter the reason, if they're fakes, a bad one slipped through a reputable battery manufacturer, hard to charge properly or the charging units themselves, it doesn't really matter. It's in the nature of Lithium Ion battery chemistry. That's the way it is.
> 
> Until flashlight designers take safety into full account, these flashlights will always have the potential to explode. To believe this can never happen to you because you do this or that, isn't logical.



You talk nothing but scaremongering nonsense and you seem to not want to listen to the guys on here who know far more than you do.Show me some hard numbers of exploding devices please.


----------



## Rosoku Chikara (Jan 18, 2015)

*Re: NEW and trying to learn. Questions*



xeroid said:


> Just to bring us all back on topic ......
> 
> It's pretty much known that lithium cells can be dangerous, no matter the reason, if they're fakes, a bad one slipped through a reputable battery manufacturer, hard to charge properly or the charging units themselves, it doesn't really matter. It's in the nature of Lithium Ion battery chemistry. That's the way it is.
> 
> Until flashlight designers take safety into full account, these flashlights will always have the potential to explode. To believe this can never happen to you because you do this or that, isn't logical.



Wow, what a thread! I go away for a few days and...

Anyway, interesting reading, except for the endless repetition. I, for one, would be in favor of a safer Li-Ion flashlight design. But, I think that the biggest factor is in the physical design, not the electronic circuitry. I see that* HKJ* agrees with me (and, I put great stock in his opinion):



HKJ said:


> LiIon batteries are not that dangerous and you would not gain much by monitoring the batteries.
> The only major shortcoming is that most flashlights are missing a proper vent path, but luckily it is very seldom a problem...<snip>



I wouldn't mind it if my flashlights had useful "vent paths" (or some kind of "over-pressure protection," most likely a rupture disc?) to prevent dangerous pressure build-up (ie: "pipe bomb" effect) in case of the albeit, rare "battery event."

But, I must say, *xeroid*, I think the burden is on you here. Please kindly describe for us exactly what kind of battery circuity you feel would significantly enhance battery safety, and how you think it would (should?) work.

If you can say anything that makes sense, some flashlight manufacturers may hear you.


----------



## Norm (Jan 18, 2015)

NEW and trying to learn.

xeroid could you tell me please why the majority of your post shouldn't be deleted as Off Topic?

Trying to learn :shakehead some of our most knowledgeable members have tried to help you learn, your response is to tell them why they're wrong. You started this thread under the pretence of wanting to learn, it seems to me you have a totally different agenda.

Closed 

If for some valid reason members think this thread should be reopened please PM me - Norm


----------

