The Dangers of Lipo Batteries

[CaptainRivet]

Originally Posted by wholybee

The BMS protects the BATTERY from damage and a shortened life. It doesn't (in the case of LFP) make it any safer.

agree with all you stated except this. Thats only correct for LTO, thats why I always state you don't need any BMS for a 1 or 2P6S LTO as its not economical for it, from 12S=24V you should due to ecomonic reasons.
But you always need a BMS for LifePo4.
The BMS protects Lifepo4 from damage to make it safer. Eg with how much amps and voltage did they overcharge the Lifepo4?

you can brute force a LifePo4 into thermal runaway, you just need enough volts and amps over a long enough periode to create that...you need a lot and long but its possible and before a lot other stuff will end up in smoke before the Lifepo4 does. Every AGM would get a thermal runaway long long before that under this conditions or a lead would explode much much earlier.
And the BMS prevents a LifePo4 even from that highly unlikly scenario.

[Melbourne Park]

In Australia, insurance companies make using Lithium very difficult. Their ploy is to insist on professional installation, so they can sue the installer. So the installers won't install lithium. So insurance is difficult to get for sail boats with Lithium Phosphate Iron.

My boat is light, I wanted to keep it that way, but I've had to put in lead acid. I would have much preferred the lighter alternative.

There are issues with Lithium Phosphate Iron though ... they are not "drop in" for boats. There are lots of stories about what might happen being inverted in Salt water ... I rang support at Lifeline / Concord batteries, and asked them ... the chap laughed and said "any battery in salt water is bad news". Now - that was my recollection of what he said ... so I may have misquoted him.

An acquaintance of mine has lithium in her solo race boat. She said that many people were concerned about the America's cup boat (an English boat) that tipped over and then inverted, and had a lithium fire ... now why would an AC boat not have Lithium Phosphate Iron batteries? But perhaps they did not ... but the lady I know is English, and was concerned, because solo or short hand sailors can invert their boats.


Here is what one report said, it happened a few weeks ago:
https://www.sail-world.com/news/2584...t-catches-fire

"After initially lying on its side, T6 rolled over to fully invert in the water with mast and double skinned main sail submerged, work quickly began to get her back upright.

The shore crew and sailors worked together for over two hours and after initially righting T6 back on its side they were able to fully right the yacht. T6 was then side towed by support boat back to the team base, where a full assessment of damage is under way.

The team also faced further challenges when the lithium batteries, that powers the yachts systems, reacted to seawater ingress causing a fire on board. The response was well managed with specialist training coming to the fore to mitigate the damage."

I think the batteries were NMCs though. They are used for electrical outboard motors I think. Any incident is bad for the reputation of Lithium phophate iron batteries.

Annoyingly too, there can be a significant quality difference in all batteries, which is complicated by the complexity of the various components that make up these batteries, compared to the non digital "mechanical" nature of lead acid.

[s/v Jedi]

Reminder: a 2x4 or any wooden board like used in boat building is more flammable than prismatic LiFePO4 cells.

Can you incinerate them? Yes but so can you incinerate the whole boat.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Reminder: a 2x4 or any wooden board like used in boat building is more flammable than prismatic LiFePO4 cells.

Can you incinerate them? Yes but so can you incinerate the whole boat.

That's not helpful IMO. The facts are that electricity in a boat has dangers. Wires can overheat etc etc. To pretend that is not case is not helpful.

A basic issue with Lithium Phosphate Iron batteries, is their dependence on internal electrical protection systems, and those are not an industrial norm - they vary from product to product. The reality is that much advertising goes into claiming "drop in" batteries, some now including their own internal chargers. The user though may just focus on a rugged battery, and not comprehend the upside issues to the battery, or the downside issues in the boat's setups which may be changed to insufficient due to the capability of Lithium Phosphate iron power.

Recently though lithium iron phosphate compatible fire extinguishers are now available. They were not available 6 months ago in Australia. Which does make me wonder ...

[sailingharry]

We often hear about insurance companies not covering lfp. While it is probably true that that is misguided ignorance on the part of the insurance company, I can't get my mind around why we care. There are two possible real world situations:

1) LFP is inherently safe and will not cause fires, explosions, noxios gases, or any insurable incident. So there is nothing for the insurance company to not cover.

2) LFP is risky if not properly installed. Amateur hacks routinely install them in such a fashion that if left unattended, they can explode, catch on fire, or cause your pet rats to grow into cougar-sized monsters. Denial of coverage is a serious concern, and reason not to install LFP.

I vote for item one, and really don't care if my insurance company won't cover LFP when I install it.

While insurance companies could look for reasons not to settle a claim, they normally have to find a causal link to an uncovered condition. I remember in my first boat, the surveyor cited me for failure to have a crash bar in front of the stove. I couldn't dream up a good solution to the problem, and talked to my insurance company. They said they didn't care if I did or didn't, but wouldn't cover an accident that would have been prevented if it were there. Any other accident would be covered. Even with LFP board, you should be covered if you lose your boat to a galley fire, a failed thru hull, or a dismasting -- but you won't be covered if your LFP battery spontaneously ignites.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Melbourne Park

That's not helpful IMO. The facts are that electricity in a boat has dangers. Wires can overheat etc etc. To pretend that is not case is not helpful.

A basic issue with Lithium Phosphate Iron batteries, is their dependence on internal electrical protection systems, and those are not an industrial norm - they vary from product to product. The reality is that much advertising goes into claiming "drop in" batteries, some now including their own internal chargers. The user though may just focus on a rugged battery, and not comprehend the upside issues to the battery, or the downside issues in the boat's setups which may be changed to insufficient due to the capability of Lithium Phosphate iron power.

Recently though lithium iron phosphate compatible fire extinguishers are now available. They were not available 6 months ago in Australia. Which does make me wonder ...

No, you are putting words in my mouth that I didn’t write. I didn’t say anything about overheating wires, you are violating rules for meaningful discussion.

Also, I was writing about prismatic cells. They do not have any electronics inside them at all and do not rely on anything electronic for their inherent safety. Those are your words, not mine, and they are wrong.

The big danger around technological advancement is not false advertising, it is people talking about it with an air of authority while in fact they are not qualified on the subject at all and sometimes even completely ignorant. That has always been the biggest obstacle to technological advancement and it will always be. Not just on electric or electronics front, I was just reminded about people claiming that those who would use Dyneema lifelines would surely die, or those with “plastic” boats etc., the list is endless.

[sailingharry]

Originally Posted by Melbourne Park

A basic issue with Lithium Phosphate Iron batteries, is their dependence on internal electrical protection systems, and those are not an industrial norm - they vary from product to product.

A key piece of that comment though is that they depend upon internal electrical protection systems FOR LONG LIFE AND CONTINUED RELIABILITY. These systems will keep you from frying a cell from over or under voltage. But they add very little protection from risk to life, limb, or property, as those are not inherently at risk.

Edit after reading Jedi's comment above. I said internal protection systems, to quote you. However, as Jedi points out, prismatic cells do not have internal systems and there are successful implementations that don't even use external BMS systems.

[CaptainRivet]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

No, you are putting words in my mouth that I didn’t write. I didn’t say anything about overheating wires, you are violating rules for meaningful discussion.

Also, I was writing about prismatic cells. They do not have any electronics inside them at all and do not rely on anything electronic for their inherent safety. Those are your words, not mine, and they are wrong.

The big danger around technological advancement is not false advertising, it is people talking about it with an air of authority while in fact they are not qualified on the subject at all and sometimes even completely ignorant. That has always been the biggest obstacle to technological advancement and it will always be. Not just on electric or electronics front, I was just reminded about people claiming that those who would use Dyneema lifelines would surely die, or those with “plastic” boats etc., the list is endless.

absolutely correct.
And regarding insurance its now a common way of dealing with claims to deny it and sit it out as insurance, doesn't matter if you are 100% right and claim is covered. The law system in most countries is overloaded, you have to pay everything upfront (lawyer, surveyor, accomodation...) then wait for 2-7years till the court case is acutally happening, then the judge "advices"=forces both parties to make an agreement (as he is lacy and don't wanna document a judge decision) so at the end you pay all your costs, get maybe 70% of damage but have an enormous damage because the boat cannot be repaired until decsion is taken.
So what happens is that a lot just fix the boat on their costs and make an arrangement if somebody is to blame and insurance gets away.
That is common tactics in insurance and I know what i am talking about, i was claims director at one of the worlds biggest insurer. I also know that is new Pantaenius claim strategy....cheaper and its not calculated into the bonus targets the total cost of a claim including internal effort!!!, always only external money effort is calculated...so if they spend 150000Euro on internal recources like law department/claims adjuster that is not calculated but save 50000Euro in your case in payments to you, they offically reduced claims cost by 50000Euro and everybody gets a nice bonus...

since a year its internal guideline at several big insurer to right away involve legal department&laywer from beginning if pantanieus is involved in any way. So don't expect a claim involving Pantenius to go smooth, if it does you are lucky.


means have your lithium installed by whom you want or yourself and let it check by surveyor and hand in the report. in this case insurance is aware of the risk and surveyor states is safely installed. If you have all risk (which you should) the insurance will have a hard till impossible time to proof that lihitum was at fault for any damage. A court case will anyhow happen because they don't want to pay....

[motion30]

Originally Posted by SY Harmony

What were the results of a direct short?

In the event of a direct short the bms Disconnect the battery

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by wholybee

….



The latest report (letter) from the ABYC discuss them doing everything they could to create a dangerous situation with a Lithium Iron Phosphate battery. Over charging, puncturing, even setting the boat on fire and watching it sink. They were unable to create a dangerous situation, thermal runaway or any of that. There was nothing dangerous about the LFP battery.



….

Boat on fire or sinking seems like a dangerous situation. For me & mine at least. Doesn’t matter whether the battery caused it or something else. Just sayin’. [emoji3]

[sjm823]

Wholybee, I was trying to reply to the post BlueH2Obound made where attached was a very good article from ABYC about their testing of the batteries. My mistake, still learning my way around posting on cruisersforum.

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by CaptainRivet

I don't spread misinformation, read the article carefully...its typical Elon Musk marketing...do you find the word LifePo4 in this article--> no you don't and in others you won't find it too. He is just pointing out its not Li-Ion and the chemical elements that gave him big negative headline are replaced with other that don't have that. As clearly stated its cell is nickel-cobalt-manganese and not LifePo4 and they all it NCA means its modifiied to have a higher engery density=more prone to thermal runaway the higher the energy density is.



The facts are:

The simple answer is it is not possible to replace LI-ION with an electric density of 266 with LifePo4 which has a density between 130 and 150 in a Model3, means your battery pack weights double in LifePo4 then Li-Ion 18650cells. And a Model3 doesn't even have even load capacity to carry double battery weight in smallest battery pack config(!!!)...and then add 5 people and lugguage ok make the pack smaller in AH, well then that Model 3 has a range of 150km max...no one would buy it...

2nd add to that that Lifepo4 can do max. 2C discharge/charge which is by far to slow to do speed charging like Tesla requesting and supercharger delivering. Means a lifepo4 you would need 4h instead of 30min to charge your model 3 which again no customer would accept. so you simply need a different lithium chemistry then LifePo4 too fullfill this specs which is nickel-cobalt-manganese modified to NCA for higher density.

Their new cell produced by CATL which they call NCA have an energy density of 244, slightly lower then 266 for LI-ION but an energy denstity that high means they are very prone to thermal runaway like the old Li-ION, just a little bit less but far far more combustible and dangerous then real LifePO4.

That new Tesla NCA cell have nothing to do with Lifepo4 in our marine vessels other then they belong to the Lihtium battery family as Li-Ion does too.

Yep, Elon shoots his mouth regularly saying things that benefit him but which are of dubious veracity.

Arguing about car range from first principles is a mistake. EPA range for the Model-3 w/ LFP is 10miles less than NCA battery, but based on recommended charging levels the LFP has 16mi more range.
https://www.recurrentauto.com/resear...others-say-yes

Also, if they could charge at 2C for the whole change cycle it would be 30min. They can’t because acceptance tapers off like FLAs as full is approach.

Charging 20-80% SoC is similar for LFP & NCA.
https://insideevs.com/news/514857/mi...-charging/amp/

[wholybee]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

We often hear about insurance companies not covering lfp. While it is probably true that that is misguided ignorance on the part of the insurance company, I can't get my mind around why we care. There are two possible real world situations:

1) LFP is inherently safe and will not cause fires, explosions, noxios gases, or any insurable incident. So there is nothing for the insurance company to not cover.

2) LFP is risky if not properly installed. Amateur hacks routinely install them in such a fashion that if left unattended, they can explode, catch on fire, or cause your pet rats to grow into cougar-sized monsters. Denial of coverage is a serious concern, and reason not to install LFP.

I vote for item one, and really don't care if my insurance company won't cover LFP when I install it.

While insurance companies could look for reasons not to settle a claim, they normally have to find a causal link to an uncovered condition. I remember in my first boat, the surveyor cited me for failure to have a crash bar in front of the stove. I couldn't dream up a good solution to the problem, and talked to my insurance company. They said they didn't care if I did or didn't, but wouldn't cover an accident that would have been prevented if it were there. Any other accident would be covered. Even with LFP board, you should be covered if you lose your boat to a galley fire, a failed thru hull, or a dismasting -- but you won't be covered if your LFP battery spontaneously ignites.

That isn't the approach insurance companies are taking. They (some) are refusing ALL coverage if you have LFP on board. Your boat becomes uninsurable.

[oubeta]

A ONEAN surfboard sunk my new boat at 3am. We barely made it off.

[Melbourne Park]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

No, you are putting words in my mouth that I didn’t write. I didn’t say anything about overheating wires, you are violating rules for meaningful discussion.

Also, I was writing about prismatic cells. They do not have any electronics inside them at all and do not rely on anything electronic for their inherent safety. Those are your words, not mine, and they are wrong.

....

I was saying that often the buyer doesn't know what is inside a lithium battery. OK he might know the cells are prismatic. But were they new, Class A+, class A, etc. Who made the BMS? Where is the heat sensor located? How robust is the location? Are the cells insulated against shock? Will the insulation degrade over time? I was not even talking about the cells. And my preference in a robust lithium, would not be prismatic - the smaller battery style lithiums offer more redundancy.

But I'll give you a brand example. The SOK marine 206 AH marine version 2636 watt hour battery. It has a nice plastic case that you can open and check out its components. But the case is not water resistant. Yet its a marine battery. The Australian distributor said to me they found it confusing, and were waiting from the factory for confirmation about a water resistance rating.

Another example - a large seller of solar gear (who installed solar panels on my house) sells lots of batteries. Its acts as advertising for his solar panel installation business (where he uses outside electrical contractors while he makes money from his hardware margin). He showed me the internals of a lithium he sells. The BMS was tiny, not much bigger than a credit card, and very thin too, the BMS had no heat sink, it was floating around on top of the cells, the wiring connections were tiny, the whole internals were appalling. Now I could have put those batteries in my boat, and thought everything is fine.

And I know of a boat that had a "fire" from lithium batteries - in Queensland. And the story was told to me by the manufacturer (ie they assemble lithium cells into cases they buy, they buy in a BMS and other components, but they design the cases and the internal designs). The boat had a lithium battery stored in its central steering pod. That pod was exposed to direct sunlight. The battery overheated, and all the internals of the pod were fried, the battery semi exploded. But it did not catch fire. But the maker of the battery said to me that direct sunlight being able to shine onto a lithium phosphate iron battery's storage area and hence heat the area, will likely cause major problems for such batteries.


With a traditional lead acid, they are an assembly of items that have are well known, and different brands offer different levels of security about their longevity and how to treat them. While their cells are connected by metal, they don't have internal wiring, they don't have heat sensors, they don't have a BMS. And while they're metal quality and acid methodologies vary enormously, hence some fail quickly while others last longer, and their usage goals will also vary greatly, they are the result of production line assembly, of a known and simple technology. While with Lithium Phosphate Iron, the internal quality is far more open to mis-assembly and poor quality components.


I think insurance companies may treat lithium phosphate iron batteries equally with lead acid in time. Pantaenius have suggested this to me. But it seems to me that a "Standard" needs to be set for marine battery usage, that the maker has to go through, to get marine boat approval. Which would give the insurer more confidence if someone installs an approved for marine usage Lithium Phosphate Iron tech battery. Which would be a better risk, than if I go out and buy a battery case, a BMS, a thermocouple or two, some some foam rubber, 4 lithium iron phosphate cells, some cabling and posts, some screws and bolts and assemble it all myself.