# ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!



## Chronos (Aug 5, 2006)

*ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

OK, I am UPSET.

This morning I put my Surefire M2 + detonator + G&P tailcap + Chop modded KL3 (LED) into the armrest of a rental Toyota Camry. We're at the beach and I brought it along as I knew we'd be out with friends all day and possibly into the night. I also took along my SF L5 w/ SW02.

Tonight we went to another beach to watch the Ferry and walk along the ocean with our friends and our kids. I took out the M2+KL3 and noticed it was dead. I then noticed by the light in the interior that the rubber tailcap had fallen off. Odd, as I checked the light (on then off) before I put it into the armrest. If the light was low I was going to grab extra cells, but it was bright (the 3x123s only had about 20 mins of use).

Well the L5 worked so I took it along for the walk. We get home and I take the lights into the beach house (10 minutes ago). 

THE AMONDOTECH CELLS "EXPLODED" IN THE M2!!! It appears the gases pushed off the rubber tailcap and the modded KL3 is clouded. I AM SO UPSET. What gases were expended? My family would have been exposed to the gases (son 6 and daughter 3 as well as my wife and I) in an enclosed car. I only removed the head and noticed the inside of the head of the light and body as well as the cell are blackened. I removed the tailcap and see the same.

It did not get hot today. We had the windows closed and even after 2 hours at the beach, when I opened the doors the car interior wasn't hot. The L5 is fine and it was in the same interior.

Right now I am MAD. I've got several hundred dollars of light ruined. I've got possible noxious gases in an enclosed car. I don't see any obvious reason the cells ruptured. I used three new cells in the light, all from the same batch from Amondotech. I ordered the 2x123 sticks and "broke" one of the sticks so I could have a 3x123 setup. I've done this in the past running a W/E 9v incan bulb and never had a problem. I know the light was turned off as I tested it before I put it into the car. It is a Toyota Camry and was not driven hard enough to knock the light around to turn it on. (The lights were lying on their sides in a short storage bin in the armrest). 

I don't understand what happened. I am stunned. This wasn't a high-draw incan; it was an efficient LED. The cells were new and matched from the same order/batch. The light was lying on its side in an armrest tray alongside an L5 (which I know has to draw more from the cells than the modded KL3). I've used the KL3 for many hours in the past few weeks and never had an issue with drained cells, even when running the G&P tailcap. I swapped a new set of cells just before we left for the beach on Friday.

However, I would like answers. I'll contact Amondotech on Monday to lodge a complaint. I'll gladly send them my light for evidence. I may even contact an attorney. I may contact a doctor too.

When I get some time I'll take pictures and post them here. 

:thumbsdow


----------



## carrot (Aug 5, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and AF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Don't know what's going on with all these cells recently... all these explosions are getting me worried.

Make sure to use disposable gloves when handling the batteries. You don't want to be touching them with bare skin.


----------



## WAVE_PARTICLE (Aug 5, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and AF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

OMG!!!! I'm glad you and your family are ok and this wasn't worse...



OK...somebody tell me what the hell is going on? What's with this apparent increase in frequency of exploding cells?  


Time to stick to single-cell applications....

Question: Why don't we hear similar stories with Li-ions? Anyone ever had a Li-ion explode on them?


WP


----------



## Chronos (Aug 5, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and AF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I've only handled the light. I didn't know when I first picked it up that it wasn't working. I clicked the tailcap clicky a few times, then noticed the tailcap had fallen off (hey, it is just rubber), and put it down and picked up the L5 instead. I'm not disassembling it again as I don't know what chemicals I may be exposed to. I don't know what chemicals we may have already been exposed to. I don't remember any noxious odors in the car.

I've already stored it in a ziplock bag and put it on the back deck. I don't want it in the house. I too am worried as this isn't a high-draw light and all the parts are new or as-new, including the cells.

I'm taking all the cells out of all of my lights tonight and storing everything in the .30 caliber ammo case. There is no sign of intense heat or fire in the car nor in the armrest. I just don't get it. The only visual clue this evening was the tailcap, but I assumed it fell just fell out. Luckily no explosions. But it does look like there had to be some pressure and heat inside of the light as the massive 1st gen KL3 head is somewhat cloudy.

I repeat: the light was off. The batteries were new. I hadn't taken the tailcap off nor adjusted it since I put in the cells on Friday morning. I used the light + cells for about 5 mins max last night when I walked the dog. I checked if the light worked this morning (I flashed myself in the eyes and saw dots for a few minutes afterwards) and know the light was off when I put it in the armrest.

WTF???


----------



## cy (Aug 5, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

you should read newbies thread on lithium cell failures..
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=124776

no more clickies with multi-lithium cell lights for me.

my theory is it takes a combination of factors to cause a lithium failure. 

posted earlier in above link...

possible primary lithium cell failure mode(s)

1. user and/or mfg places two or more primary lithium cells into incan and/or LED flashlight.

2. one or more of cells is in substantial lessor state of charge than other cell(s) in series. 100% for first cell and say 60% for second cell.

3. operator accidentally leaves light on for extended run.

4. 100% cell starts to reverse charge 60% cell. large current drain from 100% heats up source cell and 60% cell also heats up from being reversed charged.

5. if PTC is defective on host cell(s) and heavy internal reverse charge is occuring. This leads to venting with flames by one and/or both cells.

6. if this venting with flames is contained within an air tight container like a flashlight. explosion will result.

number of reported primary lithium failures has only recently spiked. past cpf threads will show timeline of failure reports. IMHO spikes in failures is directly related to primary lithium cells mfg in China. there is a need to identify who actual manufactors of failed primary cells are.

please correct me if I wrong. So far no documented venting with flames has occured with single primary lithium cell lights. No documented venting with flames has occured with li-ion cells in single cell or multiple cell lights. (bare and protected li-ion cells)
__________________


----------



## SCblur (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos, I'm glad you're okay. Sorry about your ruined light. I can only imagine how pissed off I'd be if one of my expensive lights became a pipe bomb. Hopefully you get some resolution soon.


----------



## bwaites (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos,

Thankfully your family is OK, if they were going to have symtoms, it would have been apparent by now.

That said, I have to believe that the QC on these cells (meaning all of them) has slipped some with the huge volume of cells of this type now being used.

Newbie is working hard on this, and I expect some others are also, but from what I have seen, no manufacturer is without some failures.

Bill


----------



## 270winchester (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

My experience has been extremely positive with multi-123 cell lights.

Of course I only use Surefire, Rayovac and Sanyo cells. I stay away from battery station and amondotech batts. So far, knock on wood, things have been normal.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

cy,

Interesting but I don't see much that applies to my situation. Taken from the thread you cite:

The wisdom at the moment seems to be:
- never ever mix cell brands
- never mix a new cell with a used cell
- cells that measure similar remaining new capacity, I've conducted many, many tests, and seen no failures- BatteryStation is now utilizing a device called a ZTS tester, in order to sift out new cells that have partially depleted themselves
- Always lock out your flashlight so it cannot be accidentally turned on, some folks are actually removing cells to assure the light doesn't accidentally turn on
- do not store your lithium flashlight around other items which may be hazardous
- do not short a 123 cell, it can generate gasses within the cell
- if your light drops all of a sudden in brightness, or goes out, lock it out (off). If it continues to get hot, vibrate, make funny sounds, or other wierd behavior, you should consider leaving the immediate area. Personally, I'd toss it in a safe direction/area that doesn't pose a hazard to others, but thats my personal preference.
- never, ever use a cell that has leaked a bit, or is dented/deformed.
- if the cell/flashlight gets hot, like around flame or in the sun, it may explode or internally vent.
- if possible, at a minimum, consider measuring the cell voltage with a volt meter. If the cell is low, do not use it.
- this list is by no means complete, and is only meant to be a starting guide.



None of these apply. Cells were all from the same Amondotech batch. Cells were fresh, not run down. Light was not accidentally left on. The light was not left in direct sunlight. I didh't tighten and loosen the tailcap multiple times on the same set of cells, which could theoretically gouge the metal in the battery. The light was not exposed to abuse. It was in a carpeted compartment in an armrest in a car that didn't reach 35 mph. Plus a L5 with batteries from the same batch was in the armrest the whole time. Plus the L5 was used for far more time (I have found the KL5's beam to be wonderful) so it's batteries would have been more rundown. Plus I've clicked it's clicky tailcap many more times than on the M2-bodied light.

It was a multiple-cell light. It did have a clicky tailcap. 

FWIW I'm not trying to argue, just looking for answers. My friends leave tomorrow so I'll try to take some pictures then. I also don't want to alarm my family. Yet. 

Does anyone know if the M2 body is salvageable? The detonator? Can they be cleaned? It looks like that wonderful Chop KL3 is destroyed. Sigh. I'll talk to my father tomorrow. He's a PhD in Environmental Health and spent many years with the EPA on toxin, carcinogen, and pathology studies. Though these cells may produce toxins, there may not be enough of them in these small battery containers to really do damage unless the fumes are concentrated in a confined space (like a car).


----------



## fieldops (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos,

Thank God you and your family are alright. I have to admit the recent uptake in lithium primaries going bad is scary. My best wishes to all of you. Glad you wern't hurt.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Thanks everyone for the kind words! Everyone seems to be fine. They are all in bed and I'm the nut typing on my computer. I guess two things bother me:

1. A really expensive and probably irreplaceable light may be ruined.
2. My family could have been exposed to dangerous gases and a possible explosion. In a car. 

Number 2 is what gives me chills. I guess I need to treat the lights as if they are explosive devices from now on and store them in the trunk, probably in an ammo box when transporting them. Oh yeah, the lights travel in a nice Pelican box. Yikes, imagine the carcinogens if the foam and plastic ignited.

You know, the pipebomb reference is eerily accurate. I don't yet know how bad the venting was, but it couldn't have been that bad as there are no burns on the fabric/carpet stuff in the armrest nor smoke. Yet there was enough pressure to pop off a rubber tailcap cover and obviously push vapors into the LED head.

I guess I now love my SF L1 (single cell) light a LOT MORE!


----------



## snowleopard (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

There are links to the appropriate MSDSs on newbies thread on lithium cell failures..
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=124776

MSDS = Material Safety Data Sheet = the basic document saying what chemicals are present and what their health effects are.

My guess is that this exposure is more common in the workplace than the home, so I suggest:

You might consider getting copies of the MSDSs to a doctor, preferably an occupational medicine specialist (they would have more experience with such chemical exposures). Alternatively, contact an industrial hygenist. A couple places to find these people:
Nearest research university or large medical center or medical school.
Unions, especially chemical workers union (perhaps OCAW, Oil Chemical and Atomic Workers Union, or AFL-CIO)
masscosh.org helped me with referrals to MDs and lawyers after a workplace exposure.
Since you're in MD, perhaps see if OSHA can give you a referral.
If none of these are helpful, email me at:
snowleopard 'at' newsofearth dot com

An industrial hygenist would be better than an MD in estimating whether your exposures were high enough to worry about. An MD would, of course, be the one to see to inspect you and your family for injuries.

If I'm reading you right, it sounds like you weren't in the car when this happened and you say nothing about smelling the smoke of the explosion. If this is the case then your exposures would probably be a lot lower than if you were in the car when it happened. Either way I'd prefer to run it by an expert before assuming no medical effects occurred.

If it were me, I'd run the situation and the MSDSs by my occupational medicine doctor and an industrial hygenist at my university.
--Walter


----------



## NewBie (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Chronos said:


> Thanks everyone for the kind words! Everyone seems to be fine. They are all in bed and I'm the nut typing on my computer. I guess two things bother me:
> 
> 1. A really expensive and probably irreplaceable light may be ruined.
> 2. My family could have been exposed to dangerous gases and a possible explosion. In a car.
> ...




I am **so very glad** to hear that everything is okay with you, yours, and most of your property.

I've seen some of these Primary Lithium 123 cells vent at temperatures as low as 100 degrees F (37.7C). Towards the end of the thread cy mentioned, is a link to a video where just this happens.

I'm testing one failure scenario right now, in order to learn more about it. Actual tests are in a holding pattern, while I build and program some equipment to better monitor the situation during the testing, to see what further we can learn from it. Unfortunately, I don't have the same resources that I am used to working with, doing all this at home.

I plan on making the information I gather public, so our designers can take advantage of what we learn, and design in countermeasures. In your case, it looks like the light was not even on, so even an undervoltage cutout wouldn't have stopped it.

Though, even new cells often end up partially depleted, still in the shipping box, or new from the warehouse. About how much runtime would you say you had on this new set of Lithium cells?

So, as I understand it, these were new cells from AmondoTech, from the same batch, and never abused, right? Do you know what the typical current drain was on this light?


BTW, I'm sorry to hear of the damage to a special one of a kind light, it is hard to take the loss of something special like this.


Thank you very much for relating your experience, so we can all work on this problem, and attempt to make things safe and enjoyable for everyone.


----------



## Empath (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

One of the factors making it more commonplace, is the greatly increased number of lithium celled lights in use. It wasn't long ago that the only 123 celled lights were Surefires. Now, there's an ever increasing number of manufacturers and models in use, a lot more people acquiring them, and those of us in CPF buying multiples of them.

Even if it's battery manufacturer non-specific, that huge increase should yield a huge increase in frequency of events.

I don't think that's the only reason, but it could be a factor. Regardless, we need to find all the factors.


----------



## JonSidneyB (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I wonder if price competition is a factor here. You can only bring prices so low and then there is no way to go lower without quality suffering. The absolute demand for the cheapest possible batteries has limits.

I probably use more batteries than most in here. Yes, I really do use primary cells at times.

I have never had a problem but I do not seek out the cheapest cells I can find. I use Panasonic and Duracell the most often and Surefire cells at times.

The truth is the cheapest batteries you can find scare me a bit.


----------



## cy (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

what I posted above is worth another read... 

we've had several occasions, where cpf'er w/ZTS tested NEW lithium cells way below 100%. 
if you mix a new 100% cell with a new 60% cell. reverse charge will occur as cells try to equalize. 

where clickies possibly becomes a factor. if failure has already started internally. one can easily lose track which click is which. ending leaving switch on if on light is coming out front end. 

then it would also take a defective PTC not to shut down current. 

IMHO based upon evidence gathered so far. this is the logical series of events leading to primary lithium failures.
If anyone else has a better theory, than what I've posted. please do step forward. 

no reported instances have been reported for single cell lithium lights. as this takes away reverse charge situation. 
so far all reported instances involve multi-cell, primary lithium cells and clicky switches. 

there was an instance of surefire M6 w/LOTC failing, but that was attributed to battery carrier internally shorting. 

that's why I've switched to LOTC (twistie) tailcaps on all multi cell lights. and/or switched to single cell lights. 

I've all but converted to li-ion or NMH cells long before all these lithium failures. so far no reported instances of failures for li-ion. 

does anyone know which factory makes armodo tech's private label lithium cells?



Chronos said:


> cy,
> 
> Interesting but I don't see much that applies to my situation. ......
> None of these apply. Cells were all from the same Amondotech batch. Cells were fresh, not run down. Light was not accidentally left on. ..........
> ...


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos,
Like everyone else has stated, glad you an yours are OK. This is a bummer but I would really like to know as others, including yourself, how this event came about and why. I am not familiar with all of the components this light is built up from but the clickie has me wondering. You state the light was off and yet either some circuit was closed for the flow of electricity or one of these cells just went off of its own accord. If a light is sealed like I assume this one is, a pressure differential between the inside and outside will be equalized by the system if possible. In the case of a light with a rubber boot, the boot will expand or collapse to equalize any pressure differential. If the light had been opened in a warmer or higher pressure atmosphere than that which it was left in in the car, the rubber boot might have collapsed some to equalize the pressure. If the clickie has a very soft momentary activation as many do, this equalization could well have activated the light in your absense. This could explain a flow of electricity but of course does not explain why an event took place.

If I am wrong on this possible chain of events it is probably a good idea to consider the possability anyway. A clickie light is subject to activation from external pressure greater than internal pressure and if a light has a lock out, this should be used when storing a light. Actually any light that has a means of activation which involves a depression of a switch that could also be activated by external pressure is subject to AD or unwanted activation if the external pressure is there. With many of our lights, you could drill a hole in the side of the battery tube and suck on this hole and activate the light! Well in theory anyway. It may take quite a vacuum or pressure differential for some of the switches but I would bet with some hair trigger switches or simple LOTC configurations when the tail cap is _just_ turned off, activation is possible.

With this particular light, is momentary activation quick and easy with little effort or displacement of the button?


----------



## txgolfer45 (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Sitting in the car all day, the batteries were exposed to relatively high heat (over 100 degrees) for an extended period of time. Not sure what the outside temperature was where you are. But, down in Texas, it gets over 100 degrees outside and a locked car with windows rolled up can get up to 140 degrees sitting out in the sun. I had a 2x123 flashlight in my console. I decided to take it out during the summer heat. 

Scott


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

McGizmo,

What I noticed is the action of the tailcap button was a bit long; that is, I had to depress it pretty hard to engage the light. Keep in mind this is the strobe tailcap with a circuit in it, so I wonder if the circuit was bad, with a slow leak that I did not detect? 

The cells were "new" in that they sat in a clear plastic tackle box in an ammo box in my bedroom closet before use. I had less than a few minutes on these cells in this light.

NewBie,

I've read through your information and it is great. I am very, very impressed. The only variables that I see that make sense are the tailcap (it does have a circuit to enable "strobing"), a possible bad cell/suddenly drained cells, and the possible heat in the car. It probably exceeded 100 degrees F. in the car's interior as it was in the high 80's in the sun. The L5 didn't vent so there had to be some other issue other than the heat (trying to follow some semblance of the scientific method- it is kind of control). Did the tailcap suddenly start draining the batteries to a dangerous level? Did the heat then cause a catastrophic failure? Was one of the cells "bad" that in conjunction with possible 100 F heat caused a catastrophic failure? Yikes.

I too love protected rechargeables but haven't used them in these lights. Since I have used this light with a 9v incan setup I kept rechargeables to a low priority due to the draw of high-powered incans. 

Guess we may want to reconsider using 123 primary lights as our dashboard emergency lights. I swear I thought the 123 failures I'd read about were either flukes or due to misuse. In this case it was a relatively new light, a Surefire body, a well respected modded Surefire head, a detonator extender (all of which to my eyes are pretty much passive in this event) and Amondotech 123 primaries and a G&P strobe tailcap. So again I wonder if McGizmo is on to something, but rather than pressure/temperature differences causing the tailcap to engage if the tailcap had some type of electrical current flow that initiated the disaster?


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

By the way, I'll be glad to offer to loan my light for research to anyone who is qualified for forensics research. I'd like to find out what happened so it doesn't happen to any of us again. It is locked in a ziplock and pretty much as I found it.

cy,

I see your point. I do. I appreciate all the feedback and ideas from everyone. This morning everyone is up and doing fine, so I guess the light vented in the car and the toxic fumes must have largely vented from the car before we got in it. But again imagine driving down a freeway at speed with a burning, venting flashlight in the console, dashboard, or trunk. YIKES.


----------



## Long John (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Hello Chronos

I'm happy to hear, you and your family is ok.
I'm sad about what happens.

Good points stated here. Specially I like what McGizmo said. This could be a reason for the accident.

Best regards

____
Tom


----------



## nakahoshi (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Glad your ok!!!! I would agree not to touch the light without propper saftey gear. 
Im done with Cr123 cells too. I had one super heat itself inside my HD45, Im going to use Li-ion from now on. The wrapper actually shrunk itself from the heat. Guess what brand i was using: 






They were brand new out of the shrink wrap and just a few min on time. I still havent figured out how this happend but the one battery was VERY HOT. I thought something short circuted to the body, but its not the case after viewing the cells. Still a mystery! 

Let me know if you get any response from amondotech!

My thread with CR123 problems 

good luck with getting your light back to normal,
-bobby


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Thanks Long John,

I agree that McGizmo's thoughts are interesting and as likely as anything right now, maybe more so. Great deduction at work. 

I opened the light and took a few pics with my camera phone. It looks like the cell nearest the head vented as it is black and smelly, as is the end of the KL3 head. It also isn't nearly as black. I washed my hands thoroughly after handling the light. I'll use latex gloves next time I open it.

Interestingly the last cell's base almost looks somewhat deformed, as if there was force in the head of the light and the cells were pushed hard backwards against the spring in the tailcap. Or was the tailcap's spring too tightly sprung, compressing tightly against the last cell's base, initiating the failure? I didn't notice that it took any undue pressure to engage the light yesterday morning. It does look like there was a lot of pressure in the light; I wonder if the tailcap didn't expel the gases if it could have done a good imitation of a frag grenade or IED?  

I'll post pics once I take the family out for breakfast. By the way, it is another perfect day at the DE shore! However, I will not be taking any 123 lights with us in the car.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

nakahoshi,

WOW! I did run the light the night before for about 5 mins total, a few short bursts and a couple of longer bursts. I wonder if that was enough to heat up one of the cells (perhaps the one nearest the head) causing the casing to weaken; then the heat of the car caused the casing to contract more, starting a chain event? This is absolutely wild and frightening stuff. I think I'll swear off primaries and move onto protected lithium ions. Sigh. The issue I will have is my Gladius, as it will run on a 17670 but will blink every 15 seconds or so.

OK, I did run the light for a few seconds in the morning to make sure the cells were fine. I wonder if I started the chain reaction then? I turned it on, blinded myself, turned it off and put it in the console. Hmmm.

I used to have some AW cells. Are these high enough quality?


----------



## Long John (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



McGizmo said:


> If a light is sealed like I assume this one is, a pressure differential between the inside and outside will be equalized by the system if possible. In the case of a light with a rubber boot, the boot will expand or collapse to equalize any pressure differential. If the light had been opened in a warmer or higher pressure atmosphere than that which it was left in in the car, the rubber boot might have collapsed some to equalize the pressure. If the clickie has a very soft momentary activation as many do, this equalization could well have activated the light in your absense. This could explain a flow of electricity but of course does not explain why an event took place.



To complete these thesis:

This could be the initial ignition to suck the batteries completly empty, the batteries gots hotter and starts to vent out gas. Then the inside pressure changed and expanded and as the result - the accident.

Best regards

____
Tom


----------



## EvilLithiumMan (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

How much pressure does the spring exert on the cells when the tailcap is installed? I was going through my lights a few weeks ago when I picked up my Mag-C. It had what was a popular and cheap mod about 2 1/2 years ago: Using tubing to make up the diameter difference, install three CR123's and use them to power a PR118 or similar incandesant bulb. It threw out a lot of lumens for the money.

The cells were dead, but more importantly, they were all heavily distorted in the base, crushed in by the excessive force of the Mag's tail spring. Nothing bad happened, but I make it a point now when modding a light to try to have no more spring pressure than needed for a reliable contact. The case of a CR123 has far less sturctural integrity than a C-cell.


----------



## SilverFox (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Hello Chronos,

It is good to hear that there were no injuries from this incident. I would suggest that if you happen to be driving in the car when something like this happens, it would be prudent to immediately open all of the windows to dilute and exhaust any harmful chemical gasses.

Newbie and Toppers efforts have shown that when you take a cell, drain it somewhat and couple it with a new cell, drain it at close to a 1C current draw, leave the circuit connected after the lamp has gone out, and add just the right amount of heat, you can cause a rapid vent with flame incident.

Others have shown that if you pair up a dead cell with a new cell, nothing happens.

As far as I know, no one has been able to produce a rapid vent with flame incident with two new cells that test differently on the ZTS tester. I believe this may be on Newbie's agenda for further testing, but am not sure.

I would like to pause a moment and thank everyone that has been doing testing on the various combinations that cause problems, and especially to Newbie for demonstrating a repeatable condition.

It is my humble opinion (and guess  ) that we are dealing with a boundary condition. I have tested cells at a variety of current rates and have noticed that somewhere around 1C they tend to get hotter than at higher or lower current rates.

We need heat to activate the chemical reaction. If we have too much heat, the PTC will shut things down, but if we have enough heat just below the PTC threshold, we may be able to initiate the thermal run away before the PTC can trip.

Cells are tested to a variety of "worst case" conditions. I am not aware of any "boundary condition" testing. Clamp a cell in a vice and direct short it and the protection circuits kick in and shut down the chemical reaction. However, taking a cell that is designed for pulse loads (cameras) and subject it to constant loads (flashlight) and you can possibly end up with different concerns and safety issues.

Let's take a look at the recipe for rapid venting with flame.

More than 1 cell.
Cells at differing capacities.
Enough heat to start the chemical reaction toward thermal run away, but not enough heat to trip the PTC.
Current draw in the 1C range. (This may be optional, but you need some current to initiate the chemical reaction. Simply storing cells connect in series at high temperatures does not seem to cause problems.)
A circuit.
A lack of a low voltage cut off. By keeping the circuit connected after one cell is depleted, we give the other cell the opportunity to try to charge the depleted cell.

Looking at your case, we have heat, the possibility that the cells were not matched, a reasonable possible current draw, and no low voltage cut off. The only thing we are missing is the completed circuit. It could be that there was a malfunction with the switch that left it connected...

Tom


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Either electricity was flowing in some type of circuit, designed or inadvertant (a short for instance) or it wasn't, as part of the chain in this event. For a reverse charging case, there would have been some electrical path provided I would expect. Nakohshi's experience is an anomoly to my limited grasp of what is going on as it _seems_ that a chemical reaction might have been initiated with the flow of electricity but that it may well have self sustained and continued after the circuit had been opened (turned off). Is it possible that something similar happened here?

I have tread lightly on wild speculation because wild speculation can gain momentum and gain credibility even if it is false. By the same token, granting all CR123 batteries, regardless of manufacture, the same level of consistancy, quality of assembly and inherent and effective protective or safety mechanisisms may be putting a blind eye to the actual source of the problem.

Some of you may recall a certain Ford Pinto that had a propencity of having its gas tank explode in a moderate rear end collision. The source of the explosion was of course the gas tank. One could conclude that a car with a gas tank was unsafe. Have people stopped using cars with gas tanks? Do auto accidents have exploding gas tanks as part of the damage in any significant numbers these days?

Ok, I'll go out on a limb here and qualify this *as speculation*. I think some of these events which certainly seem to be in greater frequency these days, significant frequency, may be due to the battery itself and its method of construction, inconsistancy in onboard safety mechanisisms and due to possibly inadequate QC. I believe it is possible to build an unsafe CR123 battery. I further suspect that this may be the case in a limited number and quite likely manufacturer specific. 

I am not ready to stop driving my car because some Pintos used to blow up after being rear ended. Every time I drive, I am at risk and it is very important for me to keep this in mind. It is a calculated risk and I can not calculate in the unexpected or behavior of my fellow motorist. I would like to think I reduce my risk by driving a safe and well maintained vehicle and by driving defensively and safely; or so I believe.

As Newbie has shown us, the CR123 battery is a small, energy dense. storage devise and an unwanted or unplaned event where this energy is released rapidly in an uncontrolled, not by design fashion, can have destructive and harmful results. *By design*, Newbie has initiated such events. There seems to be a case where the response of the batteries is not consistant or at the same level of magnitude and this difference is based on brand of battery and *not* model of battery. What Newbie has undertaken on his own, at his home and on his dime is something we would like to think the batery manufacturers have been doing at a much more scientific and controlled level all along. Have they? Are all manufacturers as conscientious about the quality and conformance to standards in manufacturing as well as final product? I am starting to develop a brand prejudice based on reported events. This may be based on false perceptions and I may be fooling myself on potential risks. I am aware of no evidence or reports that make me feel that in a single CR123 application that this prejudice need apply but in multi cell systems, it does.

Prior to recent events showing up in significant numbers, I was of the impression that the greatest risk potential was with the Li-Ion platform and more specifically in the realm of charging these cells as well as ganging them in series. I would not have predicted that folks would move from lithium primaries to Li-Ion as a safer haven of lower risk. Regardless of chemistry, it is clear that all of these batteries need to be well designed, well built and the design needs to include reasonable and dependable fail safes because in the real world, sh$t does happen!!

I leave you with three questions that it would be great to have professional and knowledgeable answers to:

1) Is it possible to build a *reasonably* safe CR123 battery for use in flashlights?

2) Is it possible to build an inherently unsafe or high risk CR123 battery for use in flashlights.

3) If the answer to 1) and 2) is yes for both, is it possible to identify and control the critical aspects which differentiate 1) from 2) so that 1) is the result?

At this point, my guess is that the answer to all three questions is yes but it is only a guess and there may be some significant qualifications to a yes answer that would be real nice to know and understand!!


----------



## carrot (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I'd just like to note that any benefits of "matched cells" is lost by breaking one of the matched pairs in half and adding them to another matched pair to create a triplet of cells. If Amondotech's "matched cells" are paired and tripled as they claim (based on battery capacity), then any safety benefit gained by that was lost in this case.


----------



## InfidelCastro (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Does anybody know of any cases of cells rupturing on their own while not in a light? Or basically spontaniously combusting while sitting on a shelf or whatever?

I have cells in battery carriers in the glove box of both vehicles and I'm really starting to worry. Especially with the extreme hot and cold temperatures where I live.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Let me ask this...

Do you just "know" the cells were fresh, or did you test them using a Multimeter to see if they were all pretty similar?

Voltage doesn't tell the whole story either! Flash Amps is what I go by. 

I don't have a lot of three cell lights. Only a "modded" Brinkmann Maxfire Rechargable with 3x123 and a Space Needle II. But I have LOTS of 2 cell lights, and have matched and numbered sets for this purpose.

I STILL believe that with REASONABLE precaution, we are safe enough using primary Liths.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I don't own a multimeter and wouldn't know what to do with one if I did.

Yes, these were 2x123 matched sticks from Amondotech. It is frightening to anyone not an electrical engineer (read: consumer) that there may be so much variation cell-to-cell, not even batch-to-batch, that they are liable to vent potentially lethal gases and fire if used in a very expensive and assumed safe flashlight. Yes, I broke one of the sticks but it was from the same batch. I mark every other batch, and have only purchased two batches from Amondotech. This, the second batch, were kept in a clear plastic tackle box in a .30 cal ammo can in my closet. The other batch (I only have two left) is kept in an otter case in the same ammo can and solely use in my Gladius.

I know this is all conjecture, but it almost sounds like we need to purchase and learn to utililze multimeters if we are to enjoy the hobby of flashlights. Yikes. When I spend my money on cells, I expect they are sold with SOME level of QE testing and that they all fall within some safe parameters. No, every cell won't be perfect, but with such a powerful energy source they should not be released to the public unless they meet some minimum criteria...

I've got a few minutes so I'll try to load a few pics.

EDIT: Is reasonable safety to include us testing every cell or cell stick? If so someone needs to provide this information to the general public and perhaps include one with every high-dollar flashlight sale. I'm not dodging my responsibilities; rather, I believe I've acted in an adult and responsible manner. My issue is with what may be a general lack of QE and if it is our responsibility to police the industry.


----------



## carrot (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

It seems as if it would be prudent to own a ZTS nowadays, as to minimalize the risks... What do people think of the Mini-MBT? http://www.ztsinc.com/minimbt.html


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Here are a few pics:

The KL3 head: 




Inside the top of the flashlight body: 



The inside of the tailcap: 



The inside of the bottom of the flashlight body(nearest the tailcap): 



The tailcap where the rubber cap came off(can see where black gas evacuated): 



The flashlight removed from the ziplock(no external clues as to damage):



The clouded lens of the Chop-modded 1st-gen KL3: 



The rubber tailcap: 



In the armrest compartment we inadvertently left a white milk bottle plastic top alongside the lights. One of the caps has several black specs of dust on the inside; I threw it out in case the dust was dangerous. I won't open that armrest again.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



carrot said:


> It seems as if it would be prudent to own a ZTS nowadays, as to minimalize the risks... What do people think of the Mini-MBT? http://www.ztsinc.com/minimbt.html



Feedback would be appreciated! This is probably my next purchase alongside a set of protected rechargeable cells. 

I can't imagine me taking one of these lights with me later this summer on the Appalachian trail. I'd need to take a ZTS tester along to determine the cells hadn't degraded in the heat of my backpack prior to installing them, potentially in an emergency situation... What if I leave the light in a side mesh pocket exposed to direct sunlight while I walk along the summit?

Bigger question: our troops are using multiple 123 lights in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. I have to believe the environment there is far more hostile, with high heat, lots of rough handling, and lack of time to test each cell prior to installing them in the field. What is the failure rate there? What is the potential impact of a failure in the field in a combat situation?

Sorry if I'm rambling. I guess I need to relax and let this one pass. It just bothers me that I did take precautions and didn't mix old-and-new cells. I used cells from the same order. I didn't leave it in direct sunlight. I didn't manhandle the light. I didn't leave the light on. Yet it could have fragged the interior of my car...


----------



## NewBie (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Well, on McGizmo's note...

We have seen problems with cells.

Which brands have had issues?

We have seen one set of SureFires explode and with their internals. I have also had one, in a set of two do a minor vent, during testing. I may not have hit the optimal conditions to find the scenario to make it repeatable. This takes alot of time and Lithium cells don't grow on trees. These are internally, identical to Panasonic, Energizer, Browning, Streamlight cells- all of which are USA made and state so on the package.

We have seen a few BS cell failures on cpf. I've caused a very high percentage of them to fail, under a certain set of conditions and test scenario, trying to replicate the failures.

We have seen the Cyclops cells fail.

We have now seen AmondoTech Titanium cells fail.

I know there have been more brands which have shown failures, but I can't recall them all.

For anyone who'd like to find out a little more, especially some things you can do to reduce the likelyhood of a problem, I'd encourage them to read this thread:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=124776&page=1&pp=40

Meanwhile, I'm still working on building test equipment to log information, to see what else we can glean out of things.


----------



## cy (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

L6 is one of the few lights I still run with primary lithium cells. will only use surefire cells measured with ZTS before inserting. 

already had a close call, when clickie accidently came on in my backpack. L6 got almost too hot to hold. was lucky I discovered light was on. L6 was loaded with surefire cells that measured 100% w/ZTS. 

took off clickie, switched to LOTC immediately. twisties tailcaps are almost impossible to accidently switch on. 

if you go with a high quality surefire cell (reliable PTC), measure cells with ZTS (cells balanced), then switch to LOTC (hard to accidently leave on). 

these actions reduces risk factors identified so far....

surefire cells are far from perfect, but at this point. I trust surefire cells more than others...


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I decided to disassemble the light. The cell at the top of the light (behind the LED head) is the one that ignited. The plastic wrapper on the 2x123 stick is melted and deformed, but the cells appear to be intact. The single cell is melted and appears to have exploded and ignited (pics below). I was able to carefully cleanse the M2 body and detonator; the residue washed out easily (some melted plastic remained behind but I was able to pursuade it to move on) so those parts can be salvaged. I don't know about the head; with the heat and fumes it must be ruined. The tailcap is shot too. So far I'm out a custom-modded Chop KL3 and a G&P tailcap. Grrrrr.

The cells, detritus, and tailcap are now secured in a ziplock baggie in my ammo can. If anyone wants to anaylze them please let me know (hint, hint Amondotech...)

Grrr.


----------



## snowleopard (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I'm glad everybody is OK.

Have there been any similar incidents with AA or AAA lithium batteries?

--Walter


----------



## Archangel (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

AA and AAA lithium are a different chemistry than CR123A lithium, so they shouldn't be discussed in this thread. But yes, apparently there has been.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Oh my.

**sigh**

Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light. It is good that the flashlight contained the event, some of the problems with the SureFire 9P have actually ripped open the side of the aluminum body tube.

I'd thought it was just a gas release from your earlier description.

Does the head end still operate, so you could find out what the current draw is?


----------



## nakahoshi (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



> Thats not just a simple vent, thats a cell exploding in an LED light.



This is just no good...


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



NewBie said:


> Oh my.
> 
> **sigh**
> 
> ...



Later tonight I'll try to clean up the springs and see if it still works. I don't have much hope looking at the condition of the cell directly behind it... It looks like a lot of heat and gas were expelled. I'm hoping it is ok but I think it is finished. It worked fine on my L5 body setup (2x123) and I ran it many times on the 3x123 before too. I've never had a problem with it and it seems that it was well regulated on both 2x123 and 3x123 setups.

So I guess it really was a pipebomb, wasn't it? I'm glad the KL3 and M2 body are so well made, and the tailcap was structurally sound. It must have been quite an explosion, yet there is no smoke or damage in the compartment. Weird.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Chronos said:


> Later tonight I'll try to clean up the springs and see if it still works. I don't have much hope looking at the condition of the cell directly behind it... It looks like a lot of heat and gas were expelled. I'm hoping it is ok but I think it is finished. It worked fine on my L5 body setup (2x123) and I ran it many times on the 3x123 before too. I've never had a problem with it and it seems that it was well regulated on both 2x123 and 3x123 setups.
> 
> So I guess it really was a pipebomb, wasn't it? I'm glad the KL3 and M2 body are so well made, and the tailcap was structurally sound. It must have been quite an explosion, yet there is no smoke or damage in the compartment. Weird.




Okay, if you would please PM me when you get the info, or not, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

NewBie,

Will do.

I'm taking the family out for dinner. I'll try to clean it up tonight.


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



NewBie said:


> Oh my.
> 
> **sigh**
> 
> ...


 
Yes, from my understanding, this *is an event* in a LED light. Is the fact that the head is a modded KL3 and not an incandescent germane to this event? Do we have any way of determining this? I propose that I can stick three cells in a metal tube that is not a flashlight and complete the circuit and initiate an event. I believe you can stick some metal or other conductive object in the head such that it shorts across from the battery tube to the + pole of the forward battery and also induce an event if the cells do not have on board and effective safety devices to stop said event(consider a magnet used to bridge the gap in the battery chain for instance). This particular light has a cell extender that is in the ground path. If there is significant resistance in this path and the converter is constant current it will attempt to reach the designed output current by drawing even more power from the batteries. I don't know what the switch is about or if it can demand more power, again from the cells. :shrug:

We all want to understand where the dangers and risk lie. Short of turning away from the CR123 batteries entirely, are there reasonably safe applications and considerations to make? The US is a society where law suits are brought if there is loss. The legal system supports and encourages this and it diminishes, to some extent, the loss to the individual. It also allows the individual to assume risk without financial responsibility to an extent. Legal recourse has already been mentioned in this thread I believe. Well if someone is knowingly at fault or derrilect in due diligence then perhaps there are grounds for legal recourse (might be tough suing an engineer in China though). When I first joined CPF, there were all kinds of mods and experiments and the bleeding edge was identified as just that; being at the edge where blood could and was drawn on occassion. Those of us engaged in activities with these lights understood and accepted the responsibility of our actions. None of us sought or considdered modder's or user's _insurance_. 

Well the community has grown and now there are much more sophisticated offerings and combinations of components. A misapplication or combination can result in instant magic smoke and destroyed components. 

My point here? Well just look at the subject line and consider a suit being brought against any of the players named in the component build. Did this group get together and design this light and suggest or state that it should be considered safe? Does this group have an _easy out_ by stating that this combination of components was never evaluated or intended as a flashlight, per se?

I believe the author of this thread assumed a certain and real responsibility in building or compiling this light. Unfortunately, he may not have been aware of the extent of this responsibility or its down side. I doubt any of us are! The fault in components may be an inherently unsafe system or grouping or it could be due to a single *bad* battery. It could also be the contribution of a bad battery coupled with a system that will not support the use of a bad battery or a combination of precursors not yet identified. :shrug:

None of us want to design, build or drive a Pinto with a faulty gas tank. Many of us do want to design, build and drive a reasonably safe _car_ though! The Pinto with its faulty gas tank was identified and rectified. We're not there yet. Do we drive with additional caution and seek answers or do we walk? We have the freedom to make choices and the responsibility to live with the choices we make. 

I have the inclination and desire to place the fault of recent and more prevelant events at the door of off shore manufacturers of these CR123 batteries. My inclination and desires are basd on suspicions and not fact. They may be supported by evidence but are not supported by understanding or scientific evaluation available to me. I don't want to pass any buck if it is in fact mine, though. *IF* the fault or unacceptable level of risk can be associated to batteries of unacceptable construction or design and *IF* these batteries are all manufactured off shore, what can be done about this? Drive the poor importer or supplier of these batteries out of business by not buying from them or more agressive legal tactics? They are just trying to earn an honest living and provide product and services in demand. Can pressure be brought on the battery industry itself to police itself and insure proper product in proper applications?

If I had an attorney and he (she) were to advise me, I suspect the first piece of advise would be to consider no longer building flashlights that were based on CR123 cells until the air clears on recent events. I am also certain that they would advise me to make no comment on a public forum, what so ever, in regards to safety and CR123 batteries. I would be very surprised if the absense of comment or information from battery manufactures as well as some of the _real_ flashlight manufacturers isn't due to just such legal advise. I have no doubts that the legal industry would like nothing more than to represent any and all concerned parties at any and all levels of issues and concerns. If we end up inviting them to the party, I won't need one representing me, I am out. 

Ironically, I think if these events get sensationalized effectively one could envision domestic supply to dry up specifically because of liability issues. What would be left to fill any demand? Possibly those at the root of the problem to start with? Want a conspiricy? 

The recent events that have been reported are not overwhelming in number and yet there seem to be enough of them that to consider them isolated or not statistically significant would seem to be a very foolish. While it seems that some CPF members have decided they want no part of CR123 powered lights what so ever,there may be an equal number who are completely ignoring the fact that there seems to be a problem in some as yet to be defined or understood cases. It seems that prudence and possible need would dictate an increased level of caution and alertness for anyone using these lights. I think testing and matching cells prior to use is a great precaution but it doesn't make sense that this be necessary at some point when the problem is better understood and addressed by those in a position to do so. I just can't envision a 2 for 1 sale point of purchase display at Target for an inexpensive 2xCR123 light with accompaning $100 battery tester! :green:


----------



## JonSidneyB (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

On the thought of abandoning primaries for litium ion. Don is right. An unsafe Li battery can be made.

When I was trying to get them made I had a batch of scary ones that was destroyed.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



McGizmo said:


> Y
> 
> My point here? Well just look at the subject line and consider a suit being brought against any of the players named in the component build. Did this group get together and design this light and suggest or state that it should be considered safe? Does this group have an _easy out_ by stating that this combination of components was never evaluated or intended as a flashlight, per se?
> 
> ...



The author of this thread did assemble a 1x123 extender, a tailcap, and a modded KL3. Good points Don!

I mentioned a lawyer in my first post as I was MAD this light blew up in my car, with my family present, when there _should _be low, low risk. My issue has been the venting of noxious, potentially carcinogenic gases in a tightly enclosed space. Then I find out that one of the cells _exploded_. Think pipebomb.

To your point: did the detonator get built and sold as a standalone item? Or is it advertised as a cell extender for Surefire flashlights? Is the clicky tailcap advertised as a Surefire-compatible tailcap? Or is it an item created to sit by itself on a shelf. No, these were components designed and built to be added onto a specific brand of lights. That is what I did. I in no way hold any of the accountable. I know we could debate these points ad nauseum if we wanted. I'm not a lawyer and never wanted to be one.  Heck, I tried a low-level series of mods and got bit. Bad.

I am responsible for assembling the light. I am responsible for putting it in the armrest of a rental car. I am responsible for purchasing the batteries. I'm attempting to point out that a catastrophic event occurred to me, in a situation that is far, far from what I'd consider to be the combat-type of conditions that the underlying light and cells were designed to support. A momentary flash of the light to determine it was working; storage in a safe, dark armrest. Then a sudden explosion, and the release of toxic gases.

Please do not think I'm interested in pursuing a lawsuit against anyone. This is now published on a public website. I wanted to post a warning that yes, a catastrophic event occurred, and I'd like to determine why. 

As I stated in another thread a couple of weeks ago; I think that Don, Chop, MilkySpit et al are artisans. I'm awed and amazed at what they do. Yes, I assume some risk. When I add a new component to my Carrera do I hold Porsche responsible? No. However, if I do put a tankful of gas into my car and the complex fuel system is destroyed due to water in the gas in the station's tank or a mismeasurement of octane , then yes there may be an issue of liability. But again I am not interested in that; I think the CPF community may be interested in determining 

a: What happened?
b: What is/are the causes?
c: What can we do to ensure we minimize the risks?

I think that stating the armrest got too hot for the cells is simply silly. If this is the case than we may have provided pipebombs to our troops overseas, as they operate in far hotter, more demanding environments. Remember this has happened to several off-the-shelf LED and incan lights... and to Surefire batteries too. Yikes.

To my mind, right now I think that the single cell was the culprit. I was likely undercharged from the factory, overheated when attempting to compensate for the charge mismatch, and ignited. Why did it overheat when the light was off? There was no perceptible power drain over the weekend. I've never had a misstep before with this same setup when running a KL5 or a 9v incan. Perhaps a component was not functioning properly. Perhaps the stars aligned _just right_ and the right number of variables became constants and BANG. I'd just like to know, but doubt I will.

Again, not throwing stones here. Honest. Just like to see what the great minds here think caused it, and if I and others can do anything to prevent it (outside of sinking another $100 in a battery tester).

Thanks!


----------



## InfidelCastro (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

There's supposed to be a new specialized (for us) version of the ZTS coming out that will test lithiums better, so I'm holding out for that one.


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos,
No worries and no argument here. I am truly sorry this event happened to you and grateful that there was no apparent damage beyond that done to the light itself. If it was a pipe bomb, I am glad it was such a dud! I agree whole heartedly that *WE* would like difinitive answers to your questions of a,b & c.

It would really be great if someone in the battery industry could or would shed some light on these events. As it stands, we are relying heavily on Newbie to sort this out for us, best he can and that is a heavy responsibility for him!

My biased and probably jaundiced view is that domestic manufacturers will not shed light due to likely legal considerations and the company who made the 2xCR123 light that was reported about in the Canada Air event probably has no interest in comment and possibly _less_ concern than I feel they should have. 

In your analgy, it seems likely that it was the fuel supply that was bad but I am not sure that we can just give the fuel system itself a clean bill of health either! The fuel system can be host to a fuel filter that might have stopped the damage from happening in the first place. If contaminated fuel is a statictical possibility then a fuel filter as a preventative measure could well be prudent addition. Now if the fuel system does have a fuel filter but it fails to stop contaminated fuel from damaging the fuel system because it is inadequate or below accepted standards, who gets the finger?

*EDIT: *InfidelCastro, that is good news for those interested in and willing to go to the added safety precaution of testing their batteries. However I don't think that is a viable or appropriate solution for the general population who now have access to these lights and batteries!!

I am bothered that in both this case here as well as the experience with the HD45 that the owners report that the lights were turned off and the event came about after these lights were turned off. In both cases, it was the same brand of battery but I won't suggest that this is significant because I don't know that for any certainty beyond the obvious; they were the same brand. However, if these lights were in fact off, then was the event triggered while on and the cell or cells *sustained* some chemical reaction *without current passing* through them because of a closed circuit? Such a self perpetuating reaction has not been replicated or identified to my knowledge. Do we know that a battery tester will identify a battery capable of this activity as _bad_? 

I think it is safe to state that most of us want good and safe batteries and we want to know the risks involved in using these cells. If as hobbiests we need to self determin the viability of individual cells prior to use then lets find this out and make it known!! If this is the case, I doubt we will continue to see inexpensive and readily available CR123's at least in the US! I don't think this is the case and I certainly hope it is not!! :green:


----------



## wptski (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



InfidelCastro said:


> There's supposed to be a new specialized (for us) version of the ZTS coming out that will test lithiums better, so I'm holding out for that one.


Where did you hear that?


----------



## Haz (Aug 6, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



wptski said:


> Where did you hear that?


 
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/122352&page=1&pp=30



batterystation said:


> Just a heads up. I am working with ZTS to make a "new" tester that is more geared to us flashlight nuts. This is a GREAT cause and I hope they do it. It would check ions, Lithium AAs, along with the regular stuff. I will keep everyone posted on this hopeful event.


----------



## elgarak (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Chronos, soryy to hear that this happened. Hopefully everyone in yoru family is OK.

In order to try to reconstruct what has happened, I'm not entirely sure if I understand the sequence of events. From your original post, I gather the following:

1. You take the lights, check them, turn them off, and put them down in the car.

2. Drive to the beach, have fun there.

3. Get back to the car, find the KL3 dead, get the KL5 and leave for a walk. (Here is where I'm confused. Did it happen that way?)

4. Get back to the car. Drive to the beach house.

5. You find the remnants of the explosion.

Am I correct? You did not notice the explosion; it happened in your absence, right? No one else went to the car and might have handled the light, right?


----------



## Chronos (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



elgarak said:


> Chronos, soryy to hear that this happened. Hopefully everyone in yoru family is OK.
> 
> In order to try to reconstruct what has happened, I'm not entirely sure if I understand the sequence of events. From your original post, I gather the following:
> 
> ...



elgarak,

That is pretty close.

3: At the beach having fun
4: Get back to the car and drive to town
5: Drive from town back to beach (sun has set); grab KL3 and find it dead so I take the L5 on the walk.
6: Get home and take lights inside; notice KL3 is damaged

No one else handled the light, that is correct. It was in a lined tray in the armrest alongside the L5. The car didn't go faster than 35mph, and was driven to/from my beachhouse to the beach to the town, etc. The first time I noted an issue was #5- the KL3 didn't light. I wasn't sure what could have happened but didn't have time to investigate until I got home later that evening.


----------



## RAF_Groundcrew (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I think the tailcap might be a factor, it has some kind of strobe function?

If there is any circuitry in there, it is possible that a small current leakage has taken place and started the discharge process in the cells.

I recall that the switch on the C & D size maglites also has a habit of creating a current path when there should be none (I have had a couple of large maglites with leaking Alkaline cells, and only recently thought that a switch fault may be the cause).

Lithium cells do get hot when they discharge, sometimes unevenly - the 6 cells in my SF M6 seem to get warm/hot at different levels after heavy use, rather than equally warm, could be down to different internal resistances on the cells.

Without knowing the whole story, and being able to forensically recreate the incident, speculation may lead to several conclusions, but any component that has been modified from its original design or state of integrity should be treated with some small degree of extra care, just like the warnings about over discharging unprotected cells.

I know the warnings about not mixing new/old cells, and different brands are usually printed on battery powered items, but as a community that generally runs devices and their batteries right to the edge of the performance envelope, I'm sure we're all more aware than the aerage consumer of the dangers that can result from ignorance or carelesness.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Chronos said:


> elgarak,
> 
> That is pretty close.
> 
> ...



How much time was there between 1 and 5?


----------



## Chronos (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Around 1: 12 noon to 5: 8 pm when I noticed the light was not working.


----------



## elgarak (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I'm more interested in the time between 4 and 5. Could it be that the tailcap was set to ON after you found it dead, and the explosion occured while you were on the walk?


----------



## unnerv (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> I am bothered that in both this case here as well as the experience with the HD45 that the owners report that the lights were turned off and the event came about after these lights were turned off.





> I think the tailcap might be a factor, it has some kind of strobe function?
> 
> If there is any circuitry in there, it is possible that a small current leakage has taken place and started the discharge process in the cells.



I am inclined to believe the tailcap is a factor also. I haven't been up on the HDS stuff but doesn't the HD45 have a small draw to power a circuit to monitor button presses like the ARC4?

If the G&P tailcap stobes, maybe that function had malfunctioned while put away, drawing power, and causing a drain issue. While I don't have any of their flashlight equipemnt, I have plenty of experience with their airsoft stuff, which is where they had their start. They have always produced knock off equipment for airsoft for when you couldn't afford the real thing. While their stuff was not bad, none of it was ever robust enough to consider using for real firearms. We tried once with a knock off of a hakko red dot scope on a .223. A real one was > $200 the G&P was <$100. Within about 50 shots the scope no longer functioned. While there is no direct corralation between the quality of scope and the tail cap, if I were to follow the trend and look for a point of failure in an otherwise high quality light, I would look 1st at the tail cap and then the battery.


----------



## Gary (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

We got an "OPEX" (OPerational EXperience, I think) bulletin on this a few months back. It seems that they've started a few fires at nuclear plants (for example, this one). The result being that a lot of plants have banned "non-rechargable lithium batteries" for use in flashlights.

-Gary


----------



## jsr (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Chronos - sorry to hear about your light (it is quite nice) and am glad you and your family are ok. There have been quite a few threads with ZTS results from testing of various brands of cells. The ones that are most consistent that have been tested thus far are Streamlight, Surefire, and Sanyo. I believe Tenergies tested well, but these do not have PTC. Batterystation and Titanium cells seem to have the most variance in capacity when tested, tho a recent test performed by Doug (Quickbeam) showed all the Titanium cells he received tested consistently. Many proponents of the BS and Titanium cells use the argument that there have been events with any brand cell, but it's not just an event happening that is indicative of the QC (or lack thereof), but how often an event occurs (event is inclusive of the variation in the test results). Consistency in performance is an indicator of the amount of QC and design that went into the product. Mfrs with lower rates of failures or more consistent performance at the field are either taking more yield losses at the factory or have developed more precise and costlier methods of mfr'ing and/or design. Tho I don't think the BS and Titanium cells are poorly made/designed, I do believe they (vendors/mfrs) have given up a bit in the QC and design areas to maximize yield and thus more issues are seen at the field. I reserve my BS and Titanium cells I have left for single-cell applications and now only use Rayovacs, Sanyos, SFs, or Streamlight cells in my multi-cell applications. Consistency/quality cost money and when you're trying to offer the lowest priced product with the highest profit margins, you NEED to give on a few things by improving factory yield, even if those factory yields eventually show up at the field. The data, tho not conclusive, should not be ignored and having been in the manufacturing of electronic devices for many years, I can tell you that the products you buy for lower prices, even tho they seem to perform well and do not have many field failures, are often times poorer performers, it's just that guardbands allow poorer devices/components to be hidden for the most part. Mfrs also tend to source from various qualified sources at any time, so your purchase of a product a few months later than your first purchase may have a poorer performance component in there. I've tested competitor parts used in our customers' end products and know when they're better or we're better, yet all get into the field. I'm surprised how much the performance can vary while still being ok for sale.


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

unnerve,

The HD45 is one of my designs and it is a simple twisty two stage light. I wanted also to comment on agreement with Newbie that I think that in the case where the wrapper shrunk and opened an exposed band of the battery shell, it is highly unlikely that this exposed section made a ground contact with the battery tube. Possible I suppose but unlikely. The _split_ would have to be wide enough to allow the exposed shell contact, past the stand off of the wrapper thickness, with the radiused surface inside the tube and this surface is typically anodized which is also an electrical isolation barrier.


----------



## unnerv (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Sorry Don,

I didn't mean to confuse the HD45 with the HDS EDC 42. Since it is a twisty with no circuit, the issue is probably not the tail in this case. You know what they say "when you assume you make an *** out of U and ME." My bad. 

I would still suspect the G&P tail as a possible contributer to the current issue tho.


----------



## Brighteyez (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I'd be curious to hear if you get any kind of response, excuse, or blame from the vendor. 



Chronos said:


> However, I would like answers. I'll contact Amondotech on Monday to lodge a complaint. I'll gladly send them my light for evidence. I may even contact an attorney. I may contact a doctor too.


----------



## GreySave (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Just out of curiousity.....Has anyone logged how often this has happened to lights that have been home built, modified, or altered any way as opposed to original equipment lights from conventional manufacturers such as Surefire and others?

I am not trying to point a finger at anyone. It simply would be very interesting to determine if there is any pattern and, as an interested party (I currently have two 123a multicell lights now with a third on order) I think exploring this would be of value to everyone.

Alan


----------



## Brighteyez (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Just off the top of my head and sheer memory (not necessarily reliable at my age  ) it seems that the majority of these have occurred with production lights that have not been modified. At the same time, I should note that I've been around people who have used CR123 powered lights for over 20 years, and have used them myself, and have not heard of a single incident like the ones reported here.

Now I'm not sure, as I just noticed it this morning, but a friend gave me a 4-pack of Amondotech batteries that he had just received, a few months ago. I put two of them into a Maxfire LX back then, checked the output, and haven't touched the light since. This morning when I tried it, the output looked awfully week, like the battery had gone past the 50% point. I'll check the other two that I have to see if they have also self-discharged, and I'll check the Brinkmann to see if it has a short.



GreySave said:


> Just out of curiousity.....Has anyone logged how often this has happened to lights that have been home built, modified, or altered any way as opposed to original equipment lights from conventional manufacturers such as Surefire and others?
> 
> Alan


----------



## Kiessling (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Isn't this tailcap intended for incan lights? IIRC?

And would some circuit in the regulated LED lights that checks for current draw and limits it help some?

bernie


----------



## mahoney (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I don't know what testing Amondotech does when they fabricate their shrink wrapped 2-battery 123 sticks, but for the last 2 months I've been ZTS testing and matching the battery pairs that go in my 2 cell lights. Based on my experience with my last order of Titanium 123 cells, which tested anywhere from 80% to 20% new out of the pack, I decided to cut open and test the cells in the 2 battery sticks before I use them. I have found up to a difference of 40% in the capacity of the batteries in a given "matched pair". Based on Newbie's testing, this is enough of a difference to be a concern.

The ZTS tester, or something similar, is inexpensive insurance. At only about $30 for the Mini, or $80 for the MBT-1, it's a fraction of the cost of a high end light or an ER visit. And with what I've learned about certain battery brands based on my testing with the ZTS, and testing that others have done and posted on CFP, I have formed some opinions about which battery brands I'll be buying in the future. That alone was worth the purchase price of the device.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 7, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

On my way back home tonight Wayne from Amondotech called me. Seems like a great guy. He's definitely concerned. I'm sending him the cells so he can have his engineers analyze them. 

He wants to send me a battery tester and pay for repairs to my modded KL3- I appreciate the offer. I'll check with Chop to see if he has time/can repair it. I am impressed with Wayne's offers; way above and beyond the call. I guess it is just my nature- I feel uneasy about accepting his offer, but probably will. He also wants more information about the circuit in the KL3; if I can get details I'll send it to him. We had a great conversation (I could not believe the kids stopped fighting long enough for the call! Thank goodness my wife's new car arrives tomorrow. Not a day too early  )

I'll keep everyone posted.


----------



## SilverFox (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Hello Mahoney,

I need to point out that Newbie's testing has been done with cells that he has drained prior to matching up with new cells. He has not tried testing ZTS mismatched cells. I am not sure if there will be a difference, but until this is tested, I would hesitate to draw conclusions from one scenario and apply those conclusions to a different scenario.

The Titanium cells seem to sometimes start out at a lower voltage (hence the ZTS results of less than 100% with new cells) then during the discharge the voltage rises again. I believe the rapid vent with flame recipe requires cells of around 35-45% different capacity. I have seen some differences in capacity with the Titanium cells, but not to that extent. I am not sure how differing voltages fit in, but am sure that additional testing may reveal what role voltage plays.

I am under the impression that the Titanium "matched" cells are matched on capacity and come from the same batch. I also believe they are matched on voltage, but at lower loads than the ZTS tester uses. I need to get some of the matched cells and do a test of them to see how well they are matched. 

The ZTS tester is capable of matching cells by monitoring the voltage under load. I prefer to use matched cells and the ZTS tester gives us a match on voltage under load. There are still a lot of unknowns as to what is going on, but further testing should help us better understand the situation.

Tom


----------



## carrot (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Chronos said:


> On my way back home tonight Wayne from Amondotech called me. Seems like a great guy. He's definitely concerned. I'm sending him the cells so he can have his engineers analyze them.
> 
> He wants to send me a battery tester and pay for repairs to my modded KL3- I appreciate the offer. I'll check with Chop to see if he has time/can repair it. I am impressed with Wayne's offers; way above and beyond the call. I guess it is just my nature- I feel uneasy about accepting his offer, but probably will. He also wants more information about the circuit in the KL3; if I can get details I'll send it to him. We had a great conversation (I could not believe the kids stopped fighting long enough for the call! Thank goodness my wife's new car arrives tomorrow. Not a day too early  )
> 
> I'll keep everyone posted.


:thumbsup: to Amondotech for the way this situation is being handled.

Do we know if testing and matching cells with a ZTS Mini-MBT/MBT-1 is sufficient enough to make a Lithium cell thermal runaway unlikely?


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> I've been ZTS testing and matching the battery pairs that go in my 2 cell lights. Based on my experience with my last order of Titanium 123 cells, which tested anywhere from 80% to 20% new out of the pack, I decided to cut open and test the cells in the 2 battery sticks before I use them. I have found up to a difference of 40% in the capacity of the batteries in a given "matched pair".


The ZTS test results have little correlation with the energy content of a 123 cell.



> Based on Newbie's testing, this is enough of a difference to be a concern.


Newbie's tests were done with cells that had been discharged to produce cells of diminshed energy content which has little correlation with ZTS results.


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> Do we know if testing and matching cells with a ZTS Mini-MBT/MBT-1 is sufficient enough to make a Lithium cell thermal runaway unlikely?


There is no evidence that matching cells by ZTS values has any effect on preventing these incidents.


----------



## DonnyD (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I read about 18 pages of Lunarmodual's " Roar of the Pelican" thread. I read it with interest, though I have not finished. Maybe I should. 

There was one post in that huge conversation that seemed very estute. In my own reading of thread, it was a forceful point, and it rang the ring of truth. 

Unless I am mistaken, it was publicy ignored. 

Ray_of_Light posted (on 6/12/2006):

"I have conducting some tests with primary lithium batteries, since I want to prevent this form happening to me, and I am now pretty sure of the following:

1) The cause of explosion of Lithium primaries is the presence of residual water in the battery. This can be caused from a defective crimp seal, or from uncontrolled factors in the production process, like exposition to air humidity or low cooking temperature, expecially for the MnO2 of CR123."

There is more to that post, here: https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/120888&page=13&pp=30&highlight=roar+pelican


After viewing Newbie's photograph below, does anyone believe these are two good pieces of the same puzzle?







Bwaites, who has plenty of words to spare here on candlepower forums, didn't find even one word to acknowledge Ray's contribution in post #409 of the "...Pelican" thread, but he seemed to have the same of idea. He wrote: 

"I really am starting to wonder about water being an issue. Once water gets into one of these lights, it can't get out, and everyone knows what happens with water that gets hot."

Ray said he knows what happens...just one page previous, in post #369. OK, so both guys suspect water is an issue.

Is moisture getting inside some cells through a tear in the extra-crimped crimp? I wanted to ask this question, because it was raised twice in the "..Pelican" thread, and AFAIK, it wasn't addressed. 

What about side by side testing with the Duracell 123s, once all the batteries go through the steamer (so to speak)? If Duracell doesn't practice crimping of the PTC, as Newbie has observed, then maybe there would be some interesting results from that pairing.


----------



## cy (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

your statements are misleading!

ZTS detector display may not accurately match exactly amount of charge remaining within cell. but your particular ZTS will display amount of charge remaining as compared to other cells. 

evenly matched cells is what we want! 

mis-matched cells is what causes reverse charging. using ZTS allows us to match up cells with remaining capacitys. naturally using same brand cells in series is good too. 

what ZTS will not do is detect defective PTC devices. 

IMHO it takes a combination of: mis-matched primary litium cells, defective PTC and accidentally leaving your light on (clickie) to produce a failure. 

edit: take away any ONE risk factor from list below and you have reduced danger of lithium failure by a huge factor. 

1. use ZTS to match up cells (new cells can be defective)
2. use brand of lithium cells known to have less failures in newbies tests. (less chance of defective PTC)
3. use single cell lights (cannot reverse charge)
4. don't use primary lithium cells
5. use twisties (LOTC) instead of clickies hugely reduces accidental switch-on. also if internal failure is already occurring (no light). clickies will not indicate if it's actually off. 

Dead short failures by twistie lights does not apply. lights designed for 18650 are aprox. 18.5mm ID. insert a 16.75mm primary lithium and you have a possible dead short situation in some designs. could this be why surefire eliminated support for 18650 on U2?




David_Campen said:


> The ZTS test results have little correlation with the energy content of a 123 cell.
> 
> 
> Newbie's tests were done with cells that had been discharged to produce cells of diminshed energy content which has little correlation with ZTS results.


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> ZTS detector display may not accurately match exactly amount of charge remaining within cell. but your particular ZTS will display amount of charge remaining as compared to other cells.
> 
> evenly matched cells is what we want!
> 
> mis-matched cells is what causes reverse charging. using ZTS allows us to match up cells with remaining capacitys.


None of this has been demonstrated to be true. "Testing" and "matching" cells with an MBT makes some people feel good and it probably doesn't hurt anything but there is no evidence that it is of any value.


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> I read about 18 pages of Lunarmodual's " Roar of the Pelican" thread. I read it with interest, though I have not finished. Maybe I should.


Remember that Lunarmodule has been shown to have great difficulty distinguishing fact from fantasy.



> There was one post in that huge conversation that seem very estute. In my own reading of thread, it was a forceful point, and it rang the ring of truth.
> 
> Unless I am mistaken, it was publicy ignored.
> 
> ...


Yes, I am a bit skeptical but it is an interesting hypothesis and definitely worth further experimentation.


----------



## jsr (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

If moisture is in the cells, it may be occuring during the mfr'ing process. I've been to assembly houses and mfr'ing plants in china for semiconductor devices and was surprised to see materials that have instructions explicitly stating to not leave open and expose to air left open and exposed to air. Of course, the materials absorbed moisture in the air and was the root cause of some failures that were not caught until products were in the field. Again, I'll state, if the prices are very low, something must be compromised, one of which may be quality. They cannot compromise on performance as everyone sees that daily in their usage, but quality control may not be noticed as often and increasing yields by lowering inspection/test standards will decrease cost and resulting price for the same performance. These mfr's also don't need to answer publicly to the world like Energizer and Duracell do due to their brand recognitions (which imply and require more due diligence in tighter testing and standards to compete).


----------



## Brighteyez (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

How very true. Products manufactured in China often go through many hands before any kind of brand name is assigned to it. For most consumers, the actual source of manufacturing is never known.



jsr said:


> These mfr's also don't need to answer publicly to the world like Energizer and Duracell do due to their brand recognitions (which imply and require more due diligence in tighter testing and standards to compete).


----------



## cy (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

please do explain your statement. 

I'm not convinced that when my ZTS states there's say 80% remaining. that there's truly 80% cell life remaining. 

but I am convinced that when testing simular cells, ZTS will indicate aprox. state of charge between cells. 

when ZTS states 80% or 40%, really don't care that is actually 60% and 30% remaining. 

what I'm concerned with is using cells with simular state of charge. so reverse charging will not occur or be minimal. 

ZTS achieves that, unless you care of provide proof otherwise. 

edit: I see you are slamming ZTS in this thread too...
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=128304



David_Campen said:


> None of this has been demonstrated to be true. "Testing" and "matching" cells with an MBT makes some people feel good and it probably doesn't hurt anything but there is no evidence that it is of any value.


----------



## kromeke (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Addressing DonnyD (and indirectly, Ray_of_light):

Can H2O moisture exist within a lithium battery? I can understand the cells becoming assembled with some absorbed moisture, but wouldn't the H2O react out [with the metallic lithium] once the cell is crimped (and presumably "sealed") I put sealed in quotes, because there are many different levels of sealed. My educated guess is that the seal on a crimped (is there any other seal method on 123 cells) battery would consist of a polymer which is then crimped between the metal can and the metal top. This would act as an insulater to prevent short circuit. However, because you can smell a primary 123 cell, it obviously isn't a complete seal, I assume that the solvent used in the electrolyte is able to permeate this crimp seal. Hence the odor of CR123s. 

It seems to me that any moisture that would be found in a primary lithium battery is going to react [with the lithium] upon manufacture, and the hydrogen gas from any reaction would permeate out the polymer crimp seal(assuming small quantities of H). Is this a safe assumption? Please Ray, can you elaborate on your battery chemistry knowledge? (I don't have a lot, I just have a little chemistry knowledge) I'm not trying to shoot anyone down here, I just want an explaination on how water can exist in a primary lithium battery. Any citations would be welcome.


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



cy said:


> ......
> 4. don't use primary lithium cells
> 5. use twisties (LOTC) instead of clickies hugely reduces accidental switch-on. also if internal failure is already occurring (no light). clickies will not indicate if it's actually off.
> 
> ........



In regards to 4) 

don't use any lights at all, regardless of chemistry, and the risk is greatly reduced!

In regards to 5) 

if the cickie is in a LOTC configuration, it can be even more certain of an open circuit (light off) than a standard LOTC. Back off the clickie from contact with the battery tube and there is no way you can activate the clickie and close the circuit. Back off a LOTC but not enough and depresion of the button *can* close the circuit and if the batteries are headed in an event path, you will not know by test depressing the LOTC whether you have advanced it off far enough or not. 

Plain and simple, IMHO, if the risk has not been mitigated to the point that the type of switch is no longer critical to a safety or risk reduction then the problem is still alive and on board. AD should be avoided for other known and understood reasons to be sure and is certainly a consideration still, at this stage in our understandings. 

You have your list of preventative steps for risk reduction and they all seem sound to me. I am happy for you. I personally still feel safer with using SF CR123's than I do using Li-Ion cells and my flashlight usage and storage is much better served with the selection of primaries. These are my choices and I accept the risks; what ever they are and whether or not I am aware of them. I hope to learn more from the collective knowledge and experimentation going on here. It would really be great if a battery expert were to chime in but I am not holding my breath. :green:


----------



## cy (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

it's simple enough to unscrew a clickie to prevent contact enirely. just like it's simple to back off LOTC to prevent marginal contact. but look at how many of us that never unscrew a clickie...

advantage in favor of LOTC (twistie) is clickies require ONE accidental push to switch on. VS twistie needs continous pressure to stay on. like carrying light in a backpack..

like you stated it's easy enough not to use lights at all. my mistake above for not pointing out that above list was only meant to point out. only have to avoid ONE factor to greatly reduce lithium failure. 

if you go back on all events reported so far. items I listed are possible common elements of all documented lithium failures so far. this includes failures done on purpose by newbie. 




McGizmo said:


> if the cickie is in a LOTC configuration, it can be even more certain of an open circuit (light off) than a standard LOTC. Back off the clickie from contact with the battery tube and there is no way you can activate the clickie and close the circuit. Back off a LOTC but not enough and depresion of the button *can* close the circuit and if the batteries are headed in an event path, you will not know by test depressing the LOTC whether you have advanced it off far enough or not.
> 
> :


----------



## Ray_of_Light (Aug 8, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I feel the need for some clarifications.

1. Water is the compound that, more easily, can pollute a lithium primary battery. Water is used in the production process of Mn02 (check freepatentsonline for some hints), and a lack of QC at this phase of the process will produce a form of hydrated Mn02. The timing or the temperature of the last phase of production process are very likely to be the problem.

2. The "polluted" MnO2 is not "wet" so to speak, but would not be in the anhydrous state it is required to be. Water will be eventually released when more enrgy will be present as heat. 

3. Water may enter the battery after its production, due to a mechanichal stress, or defective crimp seal, or to a defective seal. A defective seal may also be a seal that has the wrong permeability specification.

4. The MnO2 is also a catalist to other chemical reactions. As an example, the presence of perchlorate or peroxyde pollutants in the electrolyte will transform a 123 into a pipe bomb device.

5. The MnO2 decomposes at a certain temperature. The final blast originating from a 123-explosion is due to the lithium reacting with the oxygen, plus the hydrogen that has eventually been released from the decomposition of the moisture.

6. I have noted that 123 batteries that are good candidates for an explosion start heating up after the 80% or more of the electrical energy has been released, even at 1 AMp discharge current. A simple temperature meter and a dummy load will spot the defective batteries.
This, anyway, is a destructive test, in the sense that you can spot the defective battery only when you are using it. I wish I could develop a pre-emptive anti-explosion test...

7. The ZTS tester measures, rather correctly, the deliverability of energy from the battery. Hovewer, while a 20% battery is suspect, a 100% is not explosion proof either. 

8. Cells that are in series are not the prime cause for explosions. Cells in series only promote and accellerate the explosion of the single defective cell.

9. Water, other pollutants, or improper formulated electrolytes, are the cause of the reported explosions. In view of this, I would recommend fellow CPFers stop using 123 produced in non certified plants.

Regards

Anthony


----------



## NewBie (Aug 9, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



David_Campen said:


> The ZTS test results have little correlation with the energy content of a 123 cell.
> 
> 
> Newbie's tests were done with cells that had been discharged to produce cells of diminshed energy content which has little correlation with ZTS results.




There may be some misunderstandings. Lets see what we can do to spin things up.


Quickbeam did some tests and found the ZTS test results correlate with the cell's energy. You can find his test info here, complete with cell runtime:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=123801&highlight=ZTS


I've also tested way too many cells that were tested at 100% on the ZTS tester from Battery Station, and had zero cell failures, under conditions where I can consistently cause a failure with mis-matched cells. I'd never say they are 100% explosion proof though.

I am currently making a datalogger setup to collect additional data, during failure and non-failure conditions, so we can better see what is going on. One portion of planned future tests is to also check cells with various readings from the ZTS tester under the same conditions.


----------



## kromeke (Aug 9, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Thanks Anthony for the quick clairification.

Let me see if I understand correctly:

H2O is a contaminate of MnO2, because it isn't properly made anhydrous. Heat in the cell drives off the H2O in the MnO2, much like heating hydrated copper sulfate under flame will drive out the water (and make the copper sulfate anhydrous). (I'm only mentioning copper sulfate because I rememeber doing this in chemistry class, it has nothing to do with battery chemistry)

The heat occurs due to current being drawn off the cell, and the reaction providing the current(and voltage) is an exothermic reaction. The more current, the faster the reaction, the more heat is produced, the more heat that is produced, more water is driven off of the MnO2. The presence of H2O with lithium produces hydrogen, if the hydrogen cannot permeate fast enough through the seal, it causes a rupture? 

Help me out, is MnO2 have more affinity for moisture than Li? I mean, if moisture enters the cell after manufacture due to a bad seal (due to bad crimp, mechanical damage, whatever) does it get absorbed by the MnO2, react with the lithium, or some of both? Or does it depend on what material is first encountered (MnO2 vs. Lithium). 

Is moisture entry after manufacture really an issue? Or is it primarly an issue of non-anhydrous MnO2 being used for battery manufacture. 

My gut feeling is that this is bad QC in the battery manufacture (or in QC of source components), compounded by higher than designed currents being drawn off of the cell. 

Thanks again Anthony for your clairification.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 9, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



kromeke said:


> Thanks Anthony for the quick clairification.
> 
> Let me see if I understand correctly:
> 
> ...




Unfortunately, I do not see how this fits at all in the failure mode I've been able to replicate rather repeatably.

Two cells ZTS tested at 100%, ran a few dozen, zero events.

Get two more 100% ZTS tested cells. Take one and discharge it by 10-40%, and you get an event over 75% of the time, and once you dial it in, I've had up to seven failures in a row.

Take a depleted cell, and a 100% cell, hook them up, zero events.


I don't buy the water excuse. Could you elaborate on this theory and my observed results Ray-of-Light?

I could understand a cell that was hot (increase in chemical reactivity) due to a high performance 1-1.5A draw light, plus reverse charged (e.g. mis-matched cells). 

However, one cell depleted beyond 50%, I don't see the failure mode. Nor do I see it with one fully depleted. 

But if the draw goes above 1.6A, even on mis-matched cells I see no failures, and the cells don't sustain draws above this very long, as they get hot, the PTC starts kicking in, and I see no failure events.

e.g. connect the dots.


----------



## wquiles (Aug 9, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I just received my ZTS MBT-1 tester today. I had many CR123 cells that I had partially used in several lights over the last 12-18 months and it was very, very revealing to see how some of them which where stored/used together had developed miss-matches capacities. Needles to say there were many cells I will never use again and will have to safely trow away  

From now on, I will always test the cells in the ZTS before using them 

Will


----------



## NewBie (Aug 9, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I just received in, fresh Titanium cells directly from Amondotech.

Had no problem getting them to vent during my standard mismatch test.

Details here:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1540476&posted=1#post1540476


----------



## kromeke (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Don't read to much in my post #86. It is a lot of questions and speculation. Calling it a hypothosis might be a strech. I don't off the top buy the moisture explaination, but I cannot refute it. I would appreciate if anyone can make some cite any information on moisture in lithium cell manufacture. 

I'm not saying that moisture is the cause, but Anthony believes it is. I'm also not saying it isn't the cause.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

BTW, I just added video of the Lithium Primary CR123A cells from AmondoTech, failing in the link above.


----------



## HarryN (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Hi - coming late to this thread. 

A couple of safety related items for Chronos
- Please be sure to feed your family extra calcium for a few weeks - maybe to an excess, just in case there has been some F ion exposure. Milk products, etc.
- Watch for unusual rashes.

- Wash the car out with your normal cleaning soaps but add some baking soda to the mix.

I noticed to my horror that you are handling the light with bare hands in some pics. Gloves would be better.

Lastly, is there ANY chance that the cell that you split from the "stick" was somehow damaged by the separation process ? I would have guessed that a stick like that was built by a combination of electrically connecting the cells as well as an external shrink wrap ?


----------



## Chronos (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

HarryN:

Thanks for the concern! I'll definitely make sure the kids and my wife are taking extra calcium. The kids LOVE milk so it shouldn't be a problem. No rashes and no health issues at all. I assume it vented during the time I left the driver's and passenger's windows slightly open (an accident- darn rental).

Yes, I handled the light prior to knowing the cell actually "exploded/vented." The batteries, the tailcap, and the LED head are all sealed in double ziplock bags in the garage. I'm sending the cells off to Wayne today via priority mail. I'm awaiting word on what to do with the flashlight head. I was able to thoroughly scrub the M2 body and detonator with detergents and all the residue did get removed.

As for the car, it was a rental. I explained there was a battery explosion but they were non-plussed. 

The sticks are only held together by a clear plastic sleeve. When I separated the two I made a few piercings of the skin, then simply snapped them apart. They are not bonded together in any way other than the clear plastic skin.


----------



## Walt175 (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I don't know if it was mentioned, but what kind of G&P tailcap was it? Was it that new strobe version?


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> Please be sure to feed your family extra calcium for a few weeks - maybe to an excess, just in case there has been some F ion exposure. Milk products, etc.


note that fluoride is deliberately added to most drinking water supplies (and toothpaste):
http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/general/teeth/fluoride.html


----------



## Chronos (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Walt175 said:


> I don't know if it was mentioned, but what kind of G&P tailcap was it? Was it that new strobe version?



Yes, it was. It may well have closed the circuit. I just don't know. It had worked perfectly. Perhaps the tailcap did get engaged; I know we drove over a rough road to find a parking spot at the beach, but I drove at a snail's pace, and the light was on its side in a lined compartment. But I guess anything is possible.


----------



## Brighteyez (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

This article at the Cadex site might also be helpful to some people who have concerns about the Lithium and LIon battery chemistries.

http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-10.htm


----------



## SilverFox (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Hello David,



David_Campen said:


> None of this has been demonstrated to be true. "Testing" and "matching" cells with an MBT makes some people feel good and it probably doesn't hurt anything but there is no evidence that it is of any value.



I find it interesting that Newbie found that he has been unable to get any of the ZTS matched cells to vent, or rapidly vent with flame. The ZTS may not be totally "precise," but it does seem to be useful in preventing problems with mismatched cells.

Newbie's testing may not qualify as strong evidence, but I think it is a strong step in the right direction.

Tom


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> I find it interesting that Newbie found that he has been unable to get any of the ZTS matched cells to vent, or rapidly vent with flame. The ZTS may not be totally "precise," but it does seem to be useful in preventing problems with mismatched cells.
> 
> Newbie's testing may not qualify as strong evidence, but I think it is a strong step in the right direction.


I would like to see the reports of where he actually did this - MBT test a batch of cells and then demonstrate that MBT matched cells don't vent while MBT unmatched cells do vent.


----------



## SilverFox (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Hello David,



David_Campen said:


> I would like to see the reports of where he actually did this - MBT test a batch of cells and then demonstrate that MBT matched cells don't vent while MBT unmatched cells do vent.



Here is what Newbie reported...



Newbie said:


> I've ran 60 sets of Battery Station cells in this specific scenario, and got venting over 75% the time, and nearly 100% venting in the PM6. I have to emphasize that the cells need to be mis-matched by 30% (discharged by 30% on purpose and used with a fresh cell) to cause the failure mode, when they are matched e.g. ZTS tested, I was unable to get them to vent.



From this thread.

Tom


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> Here is what Newbie reported...
> 
> 
> Quote:
> ...


Yes, and I believe that Newbie is stating that he discharged the cells in a flashlight prior to the tests where venting occured. He has not demonstrated that cells with mismatched ZTS values are more likely to vent.


----------



## SilverFox (Aug 10, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Hello David,

That is correct. I was just pointing out that the ZTS test seems to be able to match cells to avoid the venting problem.

I am planning on providing Newbie with some mismatched Titanium cells to see if we can get them to vent.

If you are using a multi cell light you have a couple of choices... 

You can put "new" cells in assume that the "new" cells are matched or, you can pick up a ZTS tester and check the cells and make sure they are matched. I think the ZTS test information is valuable in adding another layer of safety while using multi cell lights.

With premium brand cells running $2.00 - 2.50 per cell and other brands running around $1.00 per cell, you may be able to quickly recover the cost of the ZTS tester by matching your own cells and still enjoy safe multi cell lighting...

Tom


----------



## NewBie (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



David_Campen said:


> note that fluoride is deliberately added to most drinking water supplies (and toothpaste):
> http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/general/teeth/fluoride.html




Take time to read the MSDS sheet, you'd find one of the problem chemicals that is produced is known as HydroFlouric Acid.

Among other things, besides not knowing you were exposed...

Cardiovascular or Blood Toxicant KLAA 
Developmental Toxicant EPA-SARA 
Gastrointestinal or Liver Toxicant RTECS 
Musculoskeletal Toxicant EPA-HEN OEHHA-CREL 
Neurotoxicant RTECS 
Reproductive Toxicant EPA-SARA 
Respiratory Toxicant ATSDR EPA-HEN HAZMAP KLAA LU OEHHA-AREL OEHHA-CREL RTECS 
Skin or Sense Organ Toxicant EPA-HEN HAZMAP KLAA OEHHA-AREL RTECS 

Ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to ecosystems and human health. 

Cornell University has a paper specific to this dangerous chemical:
"Hydrofluoric Acid (HF) is one of the most hazardous chemicals at Cornell. People have died from relatively small exposures of HF. The critical minutes immediately after an exposure can have a great effect on the chances of a victim’s survival....The fluoride ion binds calcium in the blood, bones and other organs and causes damage to tissues that is very painful and often lethal."
http://www.ehs.cornell.edu/lrs/chemInfo/infoPackets/HFProtocol.pdf


I would also encourage you to go look up the other chemicals listed on the MSDS sheet, links for it can be found here:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=124776&page=1&pp=40


There was a small discussion on this, and I'll quote one of my posts:
MSDS:
Thermal degradation may produce hazardous fumes of manganese and lithium; hydrofluoric acid; oxides of carbon and sulfur and other toxic by-products.

Manganese Dioxide (1313-13-9) 30-45%
1,2-Dimethoxyethane (110-71-4) 5-10%
Propylene Carbonate (108-32-7) 1-10%
Lithium (7439-93-2) 1-5%
Carbon Black (1333-86-4) 1-5%
Lithium Trifluoromethane Sulfonate 1-5%
Ethylene Carbonate (96-49-1) 0-5%

See MSDS:
http://www.duracell.com/oem/safety/pdf/2003_9.pdf


Energizer Primary:
Carbon Black (CAS# 1333-86-4) 0-1 %
Manganese Dioxide (CAS# 1313-13-9) 12-42%
Propylene Carbonate (CAS# 108-32-7) 0-8%
1,2-Dimethoxyethane (CAS# 110-71-4) 0-6%
1,3-Dioxolane (CAS# 646-06-0) 0-8%
Graphite (CAS# 7782-42-5) 0-3 %
Manganese Dioxide (CAS# 1313-13-9) 12-42%
Propylene Carbonate (CAS# 108-32-7) 0-8%
Lithium or Lithium Alloy (CAS# 7439-93-2) 1-6%
Lithium Perchlorate (CAS# 7791-03-9) 0-3%
Lithium Trifluoromethanesulfonate (CAS# 33454-82-9) 0-3%
Lithium Trifluoromethanesulfonimide (CAS# 90076-65-6) 0-3%

MSDS:
http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/lith...ioxide_psds.pdf


Energizer Lithium Ion:

Acetylene Black (CAS# 1333-86-4) 0-2%
Biphenyl (CAS# 92-52-4) 0-15%
Diethyl Carbonate (CAS# 105-58-8) 0-15%
Dimethyl Carbonate (CAS# 616-38-6) 0-15%
Ethyl Methyl Carbonate (CAS# 623-53-0) 0-15%
Ethylene Carbonate (CAS# 96-49-1) 0-15%
Graphite (CAS# 7782-42-5) 7-22%
Lithium Cobalt Oxide (CAS# 12190-79-3) 15-30%
Lithium Hexafluorophosphate (CAS# 21324-40-3) 0-5%
Lithium Tetrafluoroborate (CAS# 14283-07-9) 0-5%
n-Methyl Pyrrolidinone (CAS# 872-50-4) 0-1%
Oxalic Acid (CAS# 144-62-7) 0-1%
Propylene Carbonate (CAS# 108-32-7) 0-15%

Burning lithium ion batteries can produce toxic fumes including HF Acid, oxides of carbon, aluminum, lithium, copper, and cobalt. Volatile phosphorus pentafluoride may form at a temperature above 230° F.


The most of the MSDS for the Lithium Primaries also warn of Hydrofloric Acid, Lithium Hydroxide, hazardous fumes of manganese and lithium, oxides of carbon and sulfur and other toxic by-products for burning/thermal degradation of the cells.
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1484560


----------



## NewBie (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

I had the opportunity to do a second run on the Lithium Primary CR123A cells from AmondoTech, aka Titanium.

This event was a rather minor cell disassembly, and the 1/2" polycarbonate (Lexan) plate got lifted, with a few embers that blew themselves right out of the bucket, when it slightly lifted the heavy protection shield and even managed to knock the temperature meter clear off the top and onto the deck.

Here is a slow motion video of the event itself. Unfortunately, the sun set and it got dark in the middle of testing, and I didn't have the light on:
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/amon2sm.wmv

This is a real time video of the event, with video of the aftermath:
http://www.molalla.net/~leeper/amondo2.wmv


Folks, *--->*DO NOT TRY THIS YOURSELVES, IT IS EXTREMELY DANGEROUS!!!"<---*


.


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Thank you so much for your concern but there is really nothing in the MSDS that I don't already know.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



David_Campen said:


> note that fluoride is deliberately added to most drinking water supplies (and toothpaste):
> http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/general/teeth/fluoride.html






David_Campen said:


> Thank you so much for your concern but there is really nothing in the MSDS that I don't already know.




Outstanding! The difference between trace amounts of floride added to water (promotes healthy teeth and such) and HydroFluoric Acid should be a little clearer now. As well, as the extreme danger of HydroFluoric Acid which is produced by CR123A Lithium Primary cells when they fail, and some of the precautions recommended by Cornell University.


----------



## David_Campen (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



> Great, then the difference between floride added to water (promotes healthy teeth and such) and HydroFluoric Acid should be a little clearer now.


No, sorry, and your (re)posting an entire MSDS does not make you seem intelligent.


----------



## Beamhead (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



David_Campen said:


> Yes, and I believe that Newbie is stating that he discharged the cells in a flashlight prior to the tests where venting occured. He has not demonstrated that cells with mismatched ZTS values are more likely to vent.


 
:huh2: I believe he has consistantly shown that mismatched cells vent.:shrug:


----------



## cy (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

FYI posting info in great detail is Newbie's trademark. Jarhead has greatly contributed to the knowledge base of cpf. 

Newbie's super detailed work on lithium failures is easily the single most import work currently being posted on CPF. 

This is being done at great person risk and personal expense. results will benifit everyone. 




David_Campen said:


> No, sorry, and your (re)posting an entire MSDS does not make you seem intelligent.


----------



## drmaxx (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*



David_Campen said:


> No, sorry, and your (re)posting an entire MSDS does not make you seem intelligent.



:scowl: Can a moderator take care of this! This is baiting at it's worst! :scowl:


----------



## Chronos (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



David_Campen said:


> No, sorry, and your (re)posting an entire MSDS does not make you seem intelligent.



I'm sorry, may I ask how this is contributing to this thread? The explosion was real; the toxins released were real; NewBie has demonstrated time and again that mismatched cells ignite. 

No, reposting an MSDS does not indicate intelligence beyond copy-and-paste skills. Indepth analysis of the data and the underlying causes does. To this point, NewBie is attempting to standardize a testing method with the goal of demonstrating the cause of lithium cells igniting. I do not possess a PhD in Environmental Health nor do I claim to (though I know of a good number of people who do, at the CDC, EPA and other organizations) so I appreciate the effort made here. We are sharing analysis of several data points to make determinations about the cause and potential health related issues regarding exploding CR123 cells. Since my family was inadvertently exposed to this explosion and release of toxins you may assume I am very, very interested in these discussion threads.

If I may, I suggest you keep such petty insinuations either to yourself or utilize the PM button to take them up with the author. Other than critiques, do you have anything substantive to add to the discussion?


----------



## tino_ale (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

What's the matter with you!! 


David_Campen said:


> No, sorry, and your (re)posting an entire MSDS does not make you seem intelligent.


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

In terms of moderation, the community is doing a good job, IMHO. Back to the subject at hand, it seems that these recent induced events show a greater and more intense release of energy than some of the other events or vents.

I don't want to derive a false sense of security from the fact that I only use SF CR123 cells in multiple cell lights but it seems from the test results so far that a simple vent resulting from mis-matched SF cells is a much better _score_ than we have seen from some of these other brand batteries. Does this observation have statistical relevance given the limited number of tests? I realize that in making this observation I am exposing some brands to unfavorable implications and I don't take that lightly! If such an observation is premature and inappropriate, I would appreciate comments and correction for clarification. 

I realize that there is much to still be learned and Newbie is working on a means of gleaning more information and quantitative date from these induced events. However there seems to be some trends emerging and if some of us are starting to form opinnions on the test results perhaps we should sound these opinions out for a collective consensus and review. Of significance is my perception that it may be opinnions that are forming and these are not necesarily facts!!


----------



## tvodrd (Aug 11, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Nevermind- I watched the vid again more closely. :thumbsup:

Larry


----------



## NewBie (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Third vent in a row for AmondoTech Titanium CR123A cells:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1542134


----------



## NewBie (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Fourth vent in a row, see link above.

And Fifth vent.


----------



## Beamhead (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



McGizmo said:


> However there seems to be some trends emerging and if some of us are starting to form opinnions on the test results perhaps we should sound these opinions out for a collective consensus and review.


 
My opinion,

1.) I am not afraid of 2/multi cell lights, I do have a new found respect for their use.
From the very first use of any multi cell device, I have always used common sense and followed the manufacturer's warnings.

2.) All CR123's are not created equally, I will stick with the brands I use.

3.) Single cell lights are less prone to these events. (by a large margin, if at all )

4.)LED vs Incan, if the 2/multi cell LED light draws high current it may be as susceptible as a 2/multi cell Incan. 

5.)DO NOT MIX CELLS. Either by brand or varying states of charge/discharge/potential. Seems I have read this many times on many devices.

Newbie I also greatly appreciate your time and effort on this venture.:goodjob:


----------



## cy (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

originally posted here: 
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?t=124776&page=1&pp=20

below is based upon tracking lithium failure information posted on cpf. these are possible common traits, I've observed.

until someone else comes up with a better explaination, this is what I believe to be happening...

------------------
possible primary lithium cell failure mode(s)

1. user and/or mfg places two or more primary lithium cells into incan and/or LED flashlight.

2. one or more of cells is in substantial lessor state of charge than other cell(s) in series. 100% for first cell and say 60% for second cell.

3. operator accidentally leaves light on for extended run.

4. 100% cell starts to reverse charge 60% cell. large current drain from 100% heats up source cell and 60% cell also heats up from being reversed charged.

5. if PTC is defective on host cell(s) and heavy internal reverse charge is occuring. This leads to venting with flames by one and/or both cells.

6. if this venting with flames is contained within an air tight container like a flashlight. explosion will result.

number of reported primary lithium failures has only recently spiked. past cpf threads will show timeline of failure reports. IMHO spikes in failures is directly related to primary lithium cells mfg in China. there is a need to identify who actual manufactors of failed primary cells are.

please correct me if I wrong. So far no documented venting with flames has occured with single primary lithium cell lights. No documented venting with flames has occured with li-ion cells in single cell or multiple cell lights. (bare and protected li-ion cells)
__________________


----------



## McGizmo (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



> 3. operator accidentally leaves light on for extended run.



I wonder how significant this may be? If for instance, Newbie were to shut down the test at the moment the light starts to flicker and lets all cool down and then turns the circuit back on, will the electro-chemical reaction continue as before? Certainly there will be a difference in thermal state due to the _cold re-start_ but is this enough to avoid the venting or event? :shrug: I would be concerned that the potential is still real and present.


----------



## Kiessling (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

David_Campen ... as the membership has already suggested ... please leave personal attacks out of this thread and out of CPF. They are not wanted here nor are they tolerated. If you have a point to make, do so in an acceptable manner. 
Thank you very much.
Gentlemen ... go on with this important topic ... 
bernie


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 12, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I too am in the camp of "I won't stop doing it, but have a new respect for it" 

I will always match flash amps before putting the batteries in the light.

And I occasionally reverse the cells, or in the case of three 123 reverse the first and last battery.

And in the lights I have the use 123, either a pretty solid clickie such as M*g or push/twist such as SF. Meaning accidental activation is much less likely.

In addition, since I don't use the heck out of 123 lights, and I have most of a box of 50 Battery Station 123s... those shall be all I use for a while.

And I'll NEVER EVER buy Amondotech cells based on what I've read!!!


----------



## NewBie (Aug 13, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Okay, we have vent six for six on these AmondoTech Titanium cells.

This one is extra interesting and can be found here:
http://candlepowerforums.com/vb/showthread.php?p=1544916&posted=1#post1544916


----------



## Chronos (Aug 13, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I'm more than willing to throw some $ NewBie's way to test Surefire cells and other manufacturer cells once his testing platform is complete. I want to find out if the issue is common across all cell manufacturers, and if so, why; and if not, why. 

McGizmo has made a few great points (no surprise). Once the reaction begins, can it be stopped? Another question: is it possible for a light to draw more energy from one or two cells in a multi-cell light? For example, could there be more "resistance" in one cell or could a flashlight head draw an inordinate amount of energy from the cell closest to it? 

Just how stable or unstable are 123 cells? I'm not ready to toss 123 lights to the wind yet, but a better understanding of the causes of explosive venting and the potential short-term and long-term health effects would be a great goal. Right now I see that yes, cells from a few manufacturers are venting due to mismatching. Let's test Amondotech's "matched" sticks to see if they are truly matched (I bet they are). If so, this may be a great solution for other manufacturers to mimic.


----------



## mahoney (Aug 14, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Re: Amondotech's matched "sticks"

I have cut a few of these apart and tested them, because the "single" batteries from the same order registered in a wide distribution from 20% to 100% on the ZTS tester, so I got curious...while a sample of 3 is not statisticly significant, there was a 20% to 40% difference between the tested capicities in each case. I would want to test a larger sample and see much less variance in tested capacity before I would trust these. Just my opinion, YMMV.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 18, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

Wayne @ Amondotech and I exchanged emails- he received the damaged KL3 head and the vented cells and is sending them to his Engineering team. Once I receive the ZTS tester I'll test all of my remaining cells.


----------



## NewBie (Aug 20, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Thats excellent, good to hear they are looking into it.


----------



## Chronos (Aug 20, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



mahoney said:


> Re: Amondotech's matched "sticks"
> 
> I have cut a few of these apart and tested them, because the "single" batteries from the same order registered in a wide distribution from 20% to 100% on the ZTS tester, so I got curious...while a sample of 3 is not statisticly significant, there was a 20% to 40% difference between the tested capicities in each case. I would want to test a larger sample and see much less variance in tested capacity before I would trust these. Just my opinion, YMMV.



Thanks mahoney,

When I get the ZTS tester I'm going to try the same test. I'm hoping the "matched" cell sticks are exactly that. If so this would be a great solution for those of us with multiple-cell lights.

I'll keep everyone posted as I get updates.


----------



## cy (Aug 20, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

ZTS tester is far from perfect...

but until someone comes up with a better tester. ZTS is the best that's available.

purchased mine for $69 + shipping aprox one year ago. gripped about the price, but have never regretted purchasing...


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 20, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 Head!*

Checking Flash amps with a cheapy multimeter ain't the best solution either, but it's good enough for me at this time.

I had two cells just sitting here on my desk. One FA at 3.4ish, the other at 2.6ish. I'll not be putting those in any two cell light together!

I still believe after ALL the  threads that if we use reasonable precautions, primary 123 lights are plenty safe.


----------



## NewBie (Sep 13, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*



Chronos said:


> I decided to disassemble the light. The cell at the top of the light (behind the LED head) is the one that ignited. The plastic wrapper on the 2x123 stick is melted and deformed, but the cells appear to be intact. The single cell is melted and appears to have exploded and ignited (pics below). I was able to carefully cleanse the M2 body and detonator; the residue washed out easily (some melted plastic remained behind but I was able to pursuade it to move on) so those parts can be salvaged. I don't know about the head; with the heat and fumes it must be ruined. The tailcap is shot too. So far I'm out a custom-modded Chop KL3 and a G&P tailcap. Grrrrr.
> 
> The cells, detritus, and tailcap are now secured in a ziplock baggie in my ammo can. If anyone wants to anaylze them please let me know (hint, hint Amondotech...)
> 
> Grrr.




Curious, do you have any idea when you bought these?


----------



## Chronos (Sep 15, 2006)

*Re: ARGH: Accident w/Amondotech 123s and SF M2 + Detonator + G&P Tailcap + Chop KL3 H*

I placed the order on: June 3, 2006

Interesting note: I had a few untouched 2x123 sticks remaining in my battery case. I broke them apart and found a few that had non-matched cells: the top would test at 40% to 60% while the bottom cell tested at 100%

Hmmm...


----------

