PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 007
unrealistically aggressive as a test condition as well. While out of scope for this assessment, the actual duration and degree of flooding for a range of vehicle scenarios is of great importance to better understanding the desired duration of an immersion test. The third major difference across the example immersion procedures discussed above is related to post-immersion observation. Two of the three procedures mention a post-immersion observation time as part of the test procedure, yet the suggested observation time varies significantly (30 minutes versus 2 hours) and the SAE procedure does not appear to mention a significant post-observation stage to the test procedure, which stands to reason given the focus on full decomposition evidenced via no observable reactions. Focusing on the two tests that do include an observation period, there is a significant departure in the duration of observation for any reactions or events post-immersion. As with the discussion in the section above, a longer post-immersion observation period suggests more emphasis and assessment on any issues that may occur after the vehicle is removed from the flooding, a highly relevant condition for a range of stakeholders and scenarios. Moreover, other vehicle incident data and observations have suggested that incidents may occur on the order of hours or weeks after the initial incident (Smith, 2012). While weeks of observation is likely out of scope for many assessment procedures, the duration of observation post-immersion is still likely an important parameter for immersion testing. To summarize the discussion above, while several battery immersion procedures provide a strong foundation for assessing the safety-related behaviors of vehicle batteries both during and following immersion, several differences do exist adjusting the focus of a particular assessment toward “during immersion” or “post-immersion” safety behaviors. While identifying a recommended immersion and observation duration is out of the scope of this preliminary exploratory work, this testing does seek to understand some of these issues in greater detail. 1.2 Examples and Discussion of In-Field Vehicle Flooding Incidents and Related Incidents As discussed in the introduction, vehicle immersion is a relatively rare occurrence, yet it is still likely an important area for further study and evaluation since while rare, the occurrence of a thermal incident following vehicle immersion is significant and can actually create a dangerous situation not only for vehicle operators, but also for the first and secondary responders attending to the scene during and after the flood waters have receded. This section is by no means intended to provide an exhaustive overview of all thermal events related to vehicle flooding, rather highlights some relevant issues to help understand incident typologies observed. 1.2.1 Fisker Karma Issues Following Hurricane Sandy Flooding While now more of a historical example, the flooding related to Fisker vehicles during Hurricane Sandy (2012) is a strong reminder of the importance of assessing immersion response despite its relative rarity of occurrence. Battery management system (BMS) and cell-related battery issues and failures appeared in many Fisker vehicles affected by flooding related to Hurricane Sandy. A range of issues ranging from cell damage to external enclosure damage (from heating) were observed. Anecdotally, batteries that had higher water levels actually had fewer and less severe damage (suggesting more discharge in flood water likely reduced energy levels, thus reducing severity). Interestingly, many BMS modules on the higher row within the pack were still somewhat operational as evidenced by flashing LEDs. Figures 1–3 show the variety and degree 3PDF 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)