PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 006
ISO 6469-1:2019 – 6.4.2 Immersion into Water “Immerse the DUT in ambient temperature salt water (3.5-5% by weight) for 2 hours” + 2 hours post-immersion observation time. Requirements: No fire, no explosion.” (International Organization for Standardization, 2019) From this brief summary, several differences for immersion test execution can already be observed. First, the actual salinity of the water used to emulate seawater varies from 3.5% to 5% by weight. Generally speaking, higher salinity levels will lead to faster decomposition and reactions while the battery is under water and thus the discharging of the battery will happen more rapidly, and the test (from a “during-immersion” perspective) is more aggressive in terms of a battery’s ability to survive the rapid discharge. In contrast, lower salinity levels and the subsequent slower reactions will lead to a longer testing time for full decomposition or will likely result in a higher state-of-charge when the battery is removed from the immersion for observation, a second step in two of the three examples discussed above. This higher state-of- charge and reduced amount of decomposition prior to observation outside of the immersion leads to a more aggressive evaluation in terms of other factors (such as internal and external shorts within the battery and its related components). Expanding the salinity discussion further, vehicles are sometime flooded in brackish water, which has an even lower salinity level and thus may be worth considering as a supplementary testing point during any testing programs since it further emphasizes the response of the battery post-flooding, which would be a more relevant assessment for items related to stranded energy, and first/second responder best-practices (i.e., likelihood of incident following removal and draining of a flooded vehicle). The second important difference between the three sample immersion procedures discussed above is the duration of immersion for the test. In the J2464 procedure, the battery is held in the immersion “for a minimum of 2 hours or until any visible reactions have stopped.” In contrast, the ISO6469 procedure holds the battery in the immersion for 2 hours and then moves toward the observation stage. The USABC procedure suggests a minimum testing time of 2 hours, but also allows for testing to end if a safety-related failure is observed. The maximum time for the immersion is not directly specified in the USABC procedure, but it is likely that a battery would be removed near the 2-hour minimum specified testing time unless reactions were still occurring (which is somewhat unlikely). Ultimately, the longer the test procedure specifies that battery stay in the immersion (i.e., until visible reactions stop) focuses the test toward a battery’s safety behavior during the immersion, looking for safety-adverse reactions such as arcing, venting or any visible flames when the battery is held underwater. In contrast, a shorter immersion duration, removing the battery before all reactions have stopped, will allow for the test to also consider the post-immersion behavior of a battery during the specified post-immersion observation period. As will be discussed in the next section, post-immersion behavior may be an important facet of flooded battery safety behavior for more recent batteries as battery degradation and some incidents have been observed to occur following the removal of an electrified vehicle from the flood condition. With this in mind, immersion test procedures should balance an assessment of safety during and post-immersion with the duration of immersion playing a key role in determining the state of the battery during post-immersion assessment. Specifically, a fully deteriorated battery (where reactions have completely finished) is likely to have a much more muted response, if any, to any issues following removal and draining of the water. Although one may then assume that a shorter immersion time is preferred, a reasonable immersion duration from real-world experiences is not clear since too short of an immersion time may be 2PDF Image | Li-Ion Battery Pack Immersion Exploratory Investigation
PDF Search Title:
Li-Ion Battery Pack Immersion Exploratory InvestigationOriginal File Name Searched:
dot_57013_DS1.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
Product and Development Focus for Infinity Turbine
ORC Waste Heat Turbine and ORC System Build Plans: All turbine plans are $10,000 each. This allows you to build a system and then consider licensing for production after you have completed and tested a unit.Redox Flow Battery Technology: With the advent of the new USA tax credits for producing and selling batteries ($35/kW) we are focussing on a simple flow battery using shipping containers as the modular electrolyte storage units with tax credits up to $140,000 per system. Our main focus is on the salt battery. This battery can be used for both thermal and electrical storage applications. We call it the Cogeneration Battery or Cogen Battery. One project is converting salt (brine) based water conditioners to simultaneously produce power. In addition, there are many opportunities to extract Lithium from brine (salt lakes, groundwater, and producer water).Salt water or brine are huge sources for lithium. Most of the worlds lithium is acquired from a brine source. It's even in seawater in a low concentration. Brine is also a byproduct of huge powerplants, which can now use that as an electrolyte and a huge flow battery (which allows storage at the source).We welcome any business and equipment inquiries, as well as licensing our turbines for manufacturing.CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@infinityturbine.com (Standard Web Page)