-
Howdy! we're looking for donations to finish custom knowledgebase software for this forum.
Please see: Funding drive thread
This is how A123 care about quality control
- Thread starter miro13car
- Start date
dnmun
1 PW
whatto, predict however you want but you have no experience or training or even the slightest concept of how people do this kinda testing to establish the relevant failure parameters. your opinion that these are all defective cells resold in some kinda back alley illicit manner is totally repugnant. just your unmitigated bigotry against them and in support of a person who has used this technique of trashing here on the sphere the person who sells him batteries before.
999zip999
100 TW
LFP thanks as I remember vid's of some pouch cells being manufactured. Could it be storage, shipping temps ? I gotten new paint from Home depot and was crumbled inside or soured. The rep. said it could be from being frozen on the train ride to California.
Have E.S members seen problems with other loose New pouches of battery cells lifepo4 or lico ect. How rare is this problem in the battery world ?
Now gotten find a pouch vid to watch Luke "got any good battery Manufacturing porn" ? Hubba hubba.
Have E.S members seen problems with other loose New pouches of battery cells lifepo4 or lico ect. How rare is this problem in the battery world ?
Now gotten find a pouch vid to watch Luke "got any good battery Manufacturing porn" ? Hubba hubba.
dnmun
1 PW
most likely the cause is from the pouches and their trays falling off the edge of the box where the customs inspector placed them in order to search the bottom of the box.
liveforphysics
100 TW
arkmundi said:
You realize misaligned tab insulator/foil interface is a product life-safety issue. How about responsible product manufacturing?
This guy orders new cells at top dollar prices, they arrive with obvious defects, the A123 fanboy club jumps in to defend and justify product mfg defects and attack the person who ordered the products...
off topic because a123 are not wound prismatic but related are the NTSB finding on the cause of the Boeing fire:
""Specifically, GS Yuasa’s manual cell winding flattening process could create electrode foil buckling in the windings, due to the non-uniform distribution of stress in the windings. Subsequent swelling and contracting of the electrodes during charging and recharging further exacerbated these wrinkles within the winding layers.
Additionally, the manufacturer did not isolate the area where internal cell components are assembled from ultrasonic welding and tungsten inert gas welding operations. Welding can create small airborne metallic particles, which could affect the sensitive internal cell components.
The NTSB found that some of the cell manufacturing processes were not consistent with industry practices. For example, GS Yuasa used a cylindrical mandrel instead of a flattened elliptical or rectangular mandrel to produce wound prismatic battery cells, exacerbating the likelihood of wrinkles and folds during winding.
The company also chose to use three iterative steps to fill the cell electrolyte, with each step interspersed with a precharge to low voltages. The industry standard practice is to undertake a one-step filling followed by a full charging sequence. Because of the stepped process, GS Yuasa risked disrupting the development of the cells’ solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) layer, which could lead to internal short circuiting.
Finally, the NTSB found that the company used inadequate CT equipment during the post-assembly inspection process. This inspection was to ensure that the current collectors were properly welded to the winding edges, and that the cell had not been contaminated with foreign matter. However, the CT equipment had such low resolution that problems in the windings, small-sized foreign matter, and burrs might not be recognised during inspections. The CT scans also did not detect features like wrinkles, folds and creases in the cell windings, cell-to-cell inconsistencies in clearances, etc.
The NTSB report found issues with GS Yuasa’s quality control process, including a lack of formal process, inadequate screening checks, and issues with long shifts (which increase the risk of inspecting personnel missing defects).
""Specifically, GS Yuasa’s manual cell winding flattening process could create electrode foil buckling in the windings, due to the non-uniform distribution of stress in the windings. Subsequent swelling and contracting of the electrodes during charging and recharging further exacerbated these wrinkles within the winding layers.
Additionally, the manufacturer did not isolate the area where internal cell components are assembled from ultrasonic welding and tungsten inert gas welding operations. Welding can create small airborne metallic particles, which could affect the sensitive internal cell components.
The NTSB found that some of the cell manufacturing processes were not consistent with industry practices. For example, GS Yuasa used a cylindrical mandrel instead of a flattened elliptical or rectangular mandrel to produce wound prismatic battery cells, exacerbating the likelihood of wrinkles and folds during winding.
The company also chose to use three iterative steps to fill the cell electrolyte, with each step interspersed with a precharge to low voltages. The industry standard practice is to undertake a one-step filling followed by a full charging sequence. Because of the stepped process, GS Yuasa risked disrupting the development of the cells’ solid electrolyte interphase (SEI) layer, which could lead to internal short circuiting.
Finally, the NTSB found that the company used inadequate CT equipment during the post-assembly inspection process. This inspection was to ensure that the current collectors were properly welded to the winding edges, and that the cell had not been contaminated with foreign matter. However, the CT equipment had such low resolution that problems in the windings, small-sized foreign matter, and burrs might not be recognised during inspections. The CT scans also did not detect features like wrinkles, folds and creases in the cell windings, cell-to-cell inconsistencies in clearances, etc.
The NTSB report found issues with GS Yuasa’s quality control process, including a lack of formal process, inadequate screening checks, and issues with long shifts (which increase the risk of inspecting personnel missing defects).
arkmundi
10 MW
We know not what happened. wb9k has offered a very reasonable procedure to find out and do justice for the issue and people involved. dnum offered up a plausible theory that it may be shipping & customs. "obvious defects" are not at all obvious apart from having the cells in hand, which is what wb9k wants. I see no need for heaping on more scorn and further polarizing the factions.liveforphysics said:
now here is the Japan Civil Aviation Bureau findings from their report on the cause of the Boeing fire which suports the official company line:
GS Yuasa, on its part, has issued a statement defending its manufacturing operations, claiming that the “root cause of this internal short circuit remains elusive.”
-----
begin report excerpt
Except for cell 5, the four (4) cells (Cells 2, 3, 4 and 6) were
disassembled, at 100% SOC (State of Charge) for cell 2, 3, and 4, and
at 30% SOC for cell 6 respectively, to easily determine the electrode
charge condition and it was confirmed that wrinkles were present on
the anode foils in each cell. Due to the thermal damage and results
of the electrical tests, cell 6 was disassembled at 30% SOC to avoid
further damage.
----
Regarding the wrinkles observed on anodes, it is said that wrinkles
result in uneven distances between the anode and cathode and may
facilitate the formation of lithium dendrites. However, only a small
amount of possibly lithium metal was detected during the assessment
of the cells from this event. Thus, no evidence was found that
wrinkles could directly cause an internal short circuit.
However, there was no objective finding proving that those factors caused overheat
under the environment of this event. Thus, no conclusive evidence
was identified that could isolate the cause of the overheat of cell 5.
GS Yuasa, on its part, has issued a statement defending its manufacturing operations, claiming that the “root cause of this internal short circuit remains elusive.”
-----
begin report excerpt
Except for cell 5, the four (4) cells (Cells 2, 3, 4 and 6) were
disassembled, at 100% SOC (State of Charge) for cell 2, 3, and 4, and
at 30% SOC for cell 6 respectively, to easily determine the electrode
charge condition and it was confirmed that wrinkles were present on
the anode foils in each cell. Due to the thermal damage and results
of the electrical tests, cell 6 was disassembled at 30% SOC to avoid
further damage.
----
Regarding the wrinkles observed on anodes, it is said that wrinkles
result in uneven distances between the anode and cathode and may
facilitate the formation of lithium dendrites. However, only a small
amount of possibly lithium metal was detected during the assessment
of the cells from this event. Thus, no evidence was found that
wrinkles could directly cause an internal short circuit.
However, there was no objective finding proving that those factors caused overheat
under the environment of this event. Thus, no conclusive evidence
was identified that could isolate the cause of the overheat of cell 5.
Naval Research Lab findings:
Researchers at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, have
created dendrites in experimental LIB cells under controlled circumstances to isolate
variables related to dendritic creation and growth. NRL Principle Researcher Dr.
Corey Love provided information about his work in the creation of lithium dendrites
at a range of specific temperatures, in part to examine the relation of temperature to
dendrite morphology. He reviewed microphotographs and data from this
investigation and provided the following text about dendrites and their creation:
Dendrites likely nucleate from areas of surface inhomogeneities or disruptions in the surface layers which lead to non-uniform current
distribution during charging. In this case it appears the dendrites are
nucleating at locations where there is significant variation in the local stateof-charge
originating near the wrinkles seen in the electrode foils. This could
induce localized overcharging which would not necessarily be detectable in
the cell voltage.
The dendrites originate from areas of full state-of-charge and extend into
areas of lesser lithium concentration. Lithium ion is reducing to lithium
dendrites at the steep lithium ion concentration gradient between the gold and
red-brown sections of the anode. Below is a figure from my data which shows
the color change of a carbon anode when it becomes lithiated. The figure at
left shows an experimental cell of lithium metal (left) vs. carbon anode (right)
before lithiation. The figure at right shows the various stages of lithiation as
evident by color changes to the carbon anode. The varying levels of lithium
concentration are given by color: high concentration (gold), moderate
concentration (red-brown), low concentration (dark blue) and non-lithiated
carbon (gray). The dotted lines are provides to aid in the distinction of these
regions.
The more wrinkles or free volume within the cell the more likely you will
establish this steep lithium concentration gradient during cycling. This could
be due to the fact it is difficult for lithium ions to migrate through the “void”
areas of the anode materials have become delaminated from the copper
current collection. If anode materials was delaminated it would lose
electronic contact and become electrochemically inactive. In either case,
when the ratio of anode to cathode capacity decreases lithium deposition is
likely.
Once the dendrites form, they likely grown quickly with each repeated
charge/discharge cycle especially at sub-ambient temperatures where mass
transport of lithium ion in the electrolyte is reduced and intercalation kinetics
are impeded. During cell discharge it is easier for the lithium intercalated
into the carbon anode to shuttle back to the cathode and intercalate into the
LiCoO2 than for the lithium dendrite to release Li cation to the cathode.
Therefore each charge cycle grown the dendrite more and more. Low
temperatures also increase the growth rate.
35
The steep lithium concentration at the gold/red-brown interface is even more
unstable at low temperatures. Slow mass transport of ions and intercalation
kinetics at low temperature exacerbates the instability at the interface of
lithium concentration mismatch.
Dendrites can induce an internal show by at least 2 mechanisms. First, a
single dendrite may grow and ultimately make contact with the opposing
electrode surface (this typically involves piercing the polymer separator)
causing a “hard” short. Second, some dendrites may form small brittle
lithium structures which easily break off and form metallic lithium debris. If
these particles are mobile they can form a continuous network initiating a
“soft” short.
Typically dendrites formed at low temperature are more “spiky” and appear
as micron-scale extruded wires [similar to the UL microphotographs show]
rather than mossy porous deposits.
In summary, my observation is the dendrites are forming at the interface
between the fully and partially lithiated graphite. Low temperature exposure
or sub-ambient thermal excursions will induce uncontrolled dendrite growth.
The electrolyte electrical resistance is measured in terms of distance and the wrinkles
found in disassembled cells presented step changes in distance, creating localized
variations. Dr. Love and the UL researchers related that uneven charge transfer may
result in localized variations in lithiation, leading to lithium dendrite formation at the
edges of a wrinkle. The excess localized transfer of lithium ions is known as overlithiation
Researchers at the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) in Washington, DC, have
created dendrites in experimental LIB cells under controlled circumstances to isolate
variables related to dendritic creation and growth. NRL Principle Researcher Dr.
Corey Love provided information about his work in the creation of lithium dendrites
at a range of specific temperatures, in part to examine the relation of temperature to
dendrite morphology. He reviewed microphotographs and data from this
investigation and provided the following text about dendrites and their creation:
Dendrites likely nucleate from areas of surface inhomogeneities or disruptions in the surface layers which lead to non-uniform current
distribution during charging. In this case it appears the dendrites are
nucleating at locations where there is significant variation in the local stateof-charge
originating near the wrinkles seen in the electrode foils. This could
induce localized overcharging which would not necessarily be detectable in
the cell voltage.
The dendrites originate from areas of full state-of-charge and extend into
areas of lesser lithium concentration. Lithium ion is reducing to lithium
dendrites at the steep lithium ion concentration gradient between the gold and
red-brown sections of the anode. Below is a figure from my data which shows
the color change of a carbon anode when it becomes lithiated. The figure at
left shows an experimental cell of lithium metal (left) vs. carbon anode (right)
before lithiation. The figure at right shows the various stages of lithiation as
evident by color changes to the carbon anode. The varying levels of lithium
concentration are given by color: high concentration (gold), moderate
concentration (red-brown), low concentration (dark blue) and non-lithiated
carbon (gray). The dotted lines are provides to aid in the distinction of these
regions.
The more wrinkles or free volume within the cell the more likely you will
establish this steep lithium concentration gradient during cycling. This could
be due to the fact it is difficult for lithium ions to migrate through the “void”
areas of the anode materials have become delaminated from the copper
current collection. If anode materials was delaminated it would lose
electronic contact and become electrochemically inactive. In either case,
when the ratio of anode to cathode capacity decreases lithium deposition is
likely.
Once the dendrites form, they likely grown quickly with each repeated
charge/discharge cycle especially at sub-ambient temperatures where mass
transport of lithium ion in the electrolyte is reduced and intercalation kinetics
are impeded. During cell discharge it is easier for the lithium intercalated
into the carbon anode to shuttle back to the cathode and intercalate into the
LiCoO2 than for the lithium dendrite to release Li cation to the cathode.
Therefore each charge cycle grown the dendrite more and more. Low
temperatures also increase the growth rate.
35
The steep lithium concentration at the gold/red-brown interface is even more
unstable at low temperatures. Slow mass transport of ions and intercalation
kinetics at low temperature exacerbates the instability at the interface of
lithium concentration mismatch.
Dendrites can induce an internal show by at least 2 mechanisms. First, a
single dendrite may grow and ultimately make contact with the opposing
electrode surface (this typically involves piercing the polymer separator)
causing a “hard” short. Second, some dendrites may form small brittle
lithium structures which easily break off and form metallic lithium debris. If
these particles are mobile they can form a continuous network initiating a
“soft” short.
Typically dendrites formed at low temperature are more “spiky” and appear
as micron-scale extruded wires [similar to the UL microphotographs show]
rather than mossy porous deposits.
In summary, my observation is the dendrites are forming at the interface
between the fully and partially lithiated graphite. Low temperature exposure
or sub-ambient thermal excursions will induce uncontrolled dendrite growth.
The electrolyte electrical resistance is measured in terms of distance and the wrinkles
found in disassembled cells presented step changes in distance, creating localized
variations. Dr. Love and the UL researchers related that uneven charge transfer may
result in localized variations in lithiation, leading to lithium dendrite formation at the
edges of a wrinkle. The excess localized transfer of lithium ions is known as overlithiation
UL findings
According to UL, wrinkles can form dendrites by
creating “non-uniform current density distributions” within the windings due to the “uneven
contact between the electrodes and separator in a wrinkled region” (Tabaddor and others 2014).
According to UL, wrinkles can form dendrites by
creating “non-uniform current density distributions” within the windings due to the “uneven
contact between the electrodes and separator in a wrinkled region” (Tabaddor and others 2014).
A123 lost their contract after 1 year with GM. The 2015 Spark battery is over 80 pounds lighter and made by LG Chem:
General Motors Co. said Wednesday that a lithium-ion battery undergoing tests at a Warren, Mich., research center exploded, sending an employee to the hospital.
The battery exploded at about 9:00am local time Wednesday at GM's Warren Technical Center, where the auto maker designs and develops new vehicles, a company spokesman said. Emergency personnel examined five employees on the scene and transported one to a local hospital, he said.
The explosion is the latest glitch in the auto industry's efforts to bring electric vehicles to market. GM's battery-powered Volt and Nissan Motor's Leaf had disappointing sales in their first year and several start-up companies producing batteries for electric cars have struggled.
Warren Mayor Jim Fouts said in an interview the explosion inside the lab blew out three of the building's exterior windows and an eight-inch-thick (20cm) door. The building will likely need extensive renovations, he said. "They had extreme testing going on," Fouts said.
GM spokesman Greg Martin said the damage was confined to the lab, which has windows and doors designed to give way in a blast. GM and the city's fire department are investigating.
The GM employee taken to the hospital was listed in stable condition with a suspected concussion and chemical burns, according to another city official.
The battery involved in Wednesday's incident was being developed for all-electric cars, including a coming line of Spark subcompacts, and is made by A123 Systems Inc., people familiar with the matter said. An official from A123 wasn't available for comment.
-----
According to The Detroit News' David Shepardson on Twitter, "Chemical gases from the battery cells were released and ignited in the enclosed chamber. The battery itself was intact"
General Motors Co. said Wednesday that a lithium-ion battery undergoing tests at a Warren, Mich., research center exploded, sending an employee to the hospital.
The battery exploded at about 9:00am local time Wednesday at GM's Warren Technical Center, where the auto maker designs and develops new vehicles, a company spokesman said. Emergency personnel examined five employees on the scene and transported one to a local hospital, he said.
The explosion is the latest glitch in the auto industry's efforts to bring electric vehicles to market. GM's battery-powered Volt and Nissan Motor's Leaf had disappointing sales in their first year and several start-up companies producing batteries for electric cars have struggled.
Warren Mayor Jim Fouts said in an interview the explosion inside the lab blew out three of the building's exterior windows and an eight-inch-thick (20cm) door. The building will likely need extensive renovations, he said. "They had extreme testing going on," Fouts said.
GM spokesman Greg Martin said the damage was confined to the lab, which has windows and doors designed to give way in a blast. GM and the city's fire department are investigating.
The GM employee taken to the hospital was listed in stable condition with a suspected concussion and chemical burns, according to another city official.
The battery involved in Wednesday's incident was being developed for all-electric cars, including a coming line of Spark subcompacts, and is made by A123 Systems Inc., people familiar with the matter said. An official from A123 wasn't available for comment.
-----
According to The Detroit News' David Shepardson on Twitter, "Chemical gases from the battery cells were released and ignited in the enclosed chamber. The battery itself was intact"
How do know you know if the wrinkle is just the pouch outer layer or is actually alerting you to an imperfection underneath.
In any case when you compress the outside wrinkle guess what happens? I'm sure all the A123 tests was with cell made into their own battery packs with foam pads. They weren't using manila folders instead I'm sure.
In any case when you compress the outside wrinkle guess what happens? I'm sure all the A123 tests was with cell made into their own battery packs with foam pads. They weren't using manila folders instead I'm sure.
"""Unfortunately Executive management thought they were a software company and could solve there quality problems with a software patch sent over the internet. That strategy led them to a $60 million recall and eventually bankruptcy. The executive team gave themselves raises and hefty bonuses with golden parachutes before they announced their quality problems and they proceeded to go through bankruptcy. The company got sold to the Chinese and in their infinite wisdom they kept majority of the executives that drove them into bankruptcy. With that said expect to be driven hard with little reward or recognition. The good old boys club thrives at this company and if your not in the inner circle you wont.
The company had seemingly good technology but inexperienced/ non qualified management pushing the product forward. They were more concerned about getting a production line up and running than fixing the fundamental problems of the technology. The management in my department was extremely unprofessional. The technicians were constantly at odds with the senior manager and said manager was known for getting in frequent arguments and bad talking his peers and employees.
The company had seemingly good technology but inexperienced/ non qualified management pushing the product forward. They were more concerned about getting a production line up and running than fixing the fundamental problems of the technology. The management in my department was extremely unprofessional. The technicians were constantly at odds with the senior manager and said manager was known for getting in frequent arguments and bad talking his peers and employees.
liveforphysics
100 TW
arkmundi said:We know not what happened. wb9k has offered a very reasonable procedure to find out and do justice for the issue and people involved. dnum offered up a plausible theory that it may be shipping & customs. "obvious defects" are not at all obvious apart from having the cells in hand, which is what wb9k wants. I see no need for heaping on more scorn and further polarizing the factions.liveforphysics said:
Are you suggesting in shipping or customs the tabs were de-laminated, moved to a dangerous position, and then re-laminated into position?
Willfull refusal to recognize obvious and serious defects does not make the defects less real.
Flathill- Thank you for the wrinkle related reading, now more folks can understand why wrinkles = scrap.
I don't even like to handle pouch cells directly with my hands anymore, very much so for the larger formats. Many years ago with RC cells, I would toss them around and just press them flat if they bent. Now I slide something flat under them to even move them, and if I bump them into something handling them I scrap it. Until the cells are packaged in a way that protects them, every little dent and poke cause micro cracks in the coatings on the foils that become nucleation sites for microgassing.
whatever
100 kW
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2010
- Messages
- 1,297
I dont mind if my comments upset some people, its just my view based on what information is available. The other issue that I think backs my theory that the cells left a123 not through normal chanels, is the serial numbers. Why are the cells from many different batches? My theory is they were rejected and taken from the reject piles , hence the serial numbers being from many different batches i.e. all mixed up.
Its a theory.
Heres another theory that might or might not fit the evidence:
lets say a123 sells 20ahr cells to distributors for around $32usd, the distributors charge $65usd. 100% markup is pretty common in business. Lets say someone at a123 who has access to reject cells, either gets them for nothing ( as they are going to be trashed ) or gets them for very low cost ( lets say $5-10usd), the devious person then gets an associate in the mail department to send out the cells to a distributor ( the mail dept person may not even be aware they are involved). They make a tidy little profit for themselves. Stortronic is only in the next street away from a123, lets say this person who organised sending out the cells, has a direct contact with stortronic and the money transaction is done out of a123 chanels. Its a theory ...... who knows the truth, at this stage probably only one devious person?
After reading the excellent data on wrinkles posted above, I'm even more convinced wb9k will not provide the paper(s) where a123 prove that wrinkles are acceptable ( it doesn't exist I tells ya).
If you have wrinkles on the surface, there will be sub-surface damage, I have a wrinkled cell sitting next to me ( a123 20ahr korea), and its quite apparent the foil layers are damaged. Its quite possible the subsurface damage is more signicant than
the appearance given by the outer wrinkles. The outer plastic is giving some indication of whats going on inside cell.
Just one last thing, so I'm not misunderstood, I think a123 20ahr cells are fantastic cells, the technology that goes into producing them, their reliability, their safety. They are an amazing product, if I could buy a crate full of them, even older ones from korea I would do so. Maybe the reason I"ve posted so much on this thread,
is that I'm upset that somehow rejects( my view) have somehow been sent out of an a123 factory.
Its a theory.
Heres another theory that might or might not fit the evidence:
lets say a123 sells 20ahr cells to distributors for around $32usd, the distributors charge $65usd. 100% markup is pretty common in business. Lets say someone at a123 who has access to reject cells, either gets them for nothing ( as they are going to be trashed ) or gets them for very low cost ( lets say $5-10usd), the devious person then gets an associate in the mail department to send out the cells to a distributor ( the mail dept person may not even be aware they are involved). They make a tidy little profit for themselves. Stortronic is only in the next street away from a123, lets say this person who organised sending out the cells, has a direct contact with stortronic and the money transaction is done out of a123 chanels. Its a theory ...... who knows the truth, at this stage probably only one devious person?
After reading the excellent data on wrinkles posted above, I'm even more convinced wb9k will not provide the paper(s) where a123 prove that wrinkles are acceptable ( it doesn't exist I tells ya).
If you have wrinkles on the surface, there will be sub-surface damage, I have a wrinkled cell sitting next to me ( a123 20ahr korea), and its quite apparent the foil layers are damaged. Its quite possible the subsurface damage is more signicant than
the appearance given by the outer wrinkles. The outer plastic is giving some indication of whats going on inside cell.
Just one last thing, so I'm not misunderstood, I think a123 20ahr cells are fantastic cells, the technology that goes into producing them, their reliability, their safety. They are an amazing product, if I could buy a crate full of them, even older ones from korea I would do so. Maybe the reason I"ve posted so much on this thread,
is that I'm upset that somehow rejects( my view) have somehow been sent out of an a123 factory.
wb9k
10 kW
I respectfully submit that this has degenerated into a thread where long-time critics of A123 have piled on with stories from pre-bankruptcy (a different company, really), quotes from disgruntled former employees from that era, and bigoted speculation about how the Chinese are sure to run the company today. This is held up as proof that all kinds of vile skullduggery is going on today. I'm just about beyond caring at this point. I could tell you about all the progress I've made in multiple meetings investigating the case at hand before I even have an official return in my hand during this past week, but I won't. It's just going to be twisted into more ammo for the rock throwers.
I don't mind sharing this bit: There are lots of people who are starting to think this whole incident was deliberately staged as an attempt to embarrass and malign A123 and/or StorTronics publicly. I'm not convinced of it myself just yet, but there's lots of evidence (including behavior patterns that have already been covered here) that lend credence to that idea. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if this were the case. We are subjected to attempts at corporate sabotage and espionage far more sophisticated than this on a regular basis.
My opinion is that this thread should be locked--temporarily--until the complaint that started all this has had time to reach resolution. What's happening here now isn't serving any purpose to anyone with a productive goal in mind. Whether or not that happens, I've got some thinking to do after all this is resolved. Maybe I really shouldn't be on here at all, giving loads of free technical advice, helping speed resolution of complaints, and sending parts to people all over the globe--for free--so that they can build packs the right way. Maybe it's time for me to leave this place altogether. Your call, folks. It really is.
I don't mind sharing this bit: There are lots of people who are starting to think this whole incident was deliberately staged as an attempt to embarrass and malign A123 and/or StorTronics publicly. I'm not convinced of it myself just yet, but there's lots of evidence (including behavior patterns that have already been covered here) that lend credence to that idea. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if this were the case. We are subjected to attempts at corporate sabotage and espionage far more sophisticated than this on a regular basis.
My opinion is that this thread should be locked--temporarily--until the complaint that started all this has had time to reach resolution. What's happening here now isn't serving any purpose to anyone with a productive goal in mind. Whether or not that happens, I've got some thinking to do after all this is resolved. Maybe I really shouldn't be on here at all, giving loads of free technical advice, helping speed resolution of complaints, and sending parts to people all over the globe--for free--so that they can build packs the right way. Maybe it's time for me to leave this place altogether. Your call, folks. It really is.
wb9k said:
I don't like buying batteries from an unknown distributor. I remember being ecstatic when A123 went with EVDM Corporation so I could buy batteries from a known and recognized vendor that A123 supported and quickly did so and was extremely happy with my batteries and my experience with the vendor.
Then I got an email on February 20, 2015 from EVDM Corporation stating that they were no longer going to be able to sell A123 batteries. I had invested a lot of research and time learning how to work with the batteries. They are the safest batteries to work with out there for a hobbyist like myself and there was no announcement of another vendor.
Then I got an email that there was a new distributor StorTronics and was glad A123 was not pulling out of the hobbyist market.
I would be sadly disappointed if A123 let a few bad apples spoil the opportunity to work with such great battery technology in the hobbyist community directly from a distributor that A123 supports.
I'll end this with how that email announcement ended from Paulette at A123 systems. Thank you for your continued support.
whatever
100 kW
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2010
- Messages
- 1,297
we are still waiting on the a123 paper that wb9k promised which proves wrinkles are not a problem. Convenient point for him to pull out of endless sphere forum.
If my theory is correct on how/why these cells got sent out, what would the person responsible being doing?
My guess is they would either be doing nothing and hoping for the best, or working very hard to divert attention from themself.
If my theory is correct on how/why these cells got sent out, what would the person responsible being doing?
My guess is they would either be doing nothing and hoping for the best, or working very hard to divert attention from themself.
agniusm
1 MW
This is the net and people share what they think be it good or bad. Some here take it to serious. Can someone tell me what my mood is now? Get the point?
There is no point for theories and other talks. Cells at least were not as described and therefore had to be replaced by Stortronics free of charge. I have my opinion A123 and thats that, I dont want to deal with them through anyone. Only thing that everyone should take from this, that quality of a product from this company could be 50/50, take a chance if you like but the matters must be sorted with stortronics.
There is no point for theories and other talks. Cells at least were not as described and therefore had to be replaced by Stortronics free of charge. I have my opinion A123 and thats that, I dont want to deal with them through anyone. Only thing that everyone should take from this, that quality of a product from this company could be 50/50, take a chance if you like but the matters must be sorted with stortronics.
A234
But what makes Chiang's ordinary-looking beige Toyota Prius even more special is that it's powered by a breakthrough battery that he invented and is working to turn into the kind of high-tech, green, "Made in America" product that many see as the key to the nation's economic future.
That's why A123 had to give in and build its first plants in China, where the company could move into production quickly to show auto industry customers that it could deliver on future contracts.
"Without question, we would rather have done it all in the U.S.," said Chiang, who left Taiwan as a 6-year-old with his family, earned degrees at MIT and has been a materials science professor there since the mid-1980s. "I'm an American citizen. We're an American company. It's an American-born technology."
Despite the obstacles, A123 and a few other advanced battery producers are building plants in Michigan and other states, thanks to massive government support that has offset Wall Street's skepticism and should help domestic producers narrow cost disadvantages with Asian rivals.
A123 is getting $250 million in aid from the Obama administration's stimulus program as well as tax incentives from Michigan. Its first U.S. plant opens in June in an abandoned brick building near Detroit that once made VHS tapes for Disney.
A123 has five plants in China, coincidentally located in Chiang's father's hometown of Changzhou, about two hours' drive west of Shanghai.
Bart Riley, an A123 co-founder and chief technology officer, figured it took about nine months to get a Chinese factory up and running, one-third the time typical for the U.S.
The quicker launch helped A123 make a name for itself through Black & Decker, which in early 2006 began putting A123 batteries in its DeWalt power tools.
Since then, A123 has been supplying batteries and battery systems for New York City buses built by Daimler, among other customers, and the company has agreements to develop products for Chrysler, Navistar and American green-car maker Fisker Automotive.
But in ramping up production in China, A123 paid an immeasurable price: loss of its intellectual property, the ideas and engineering that made its products better.
The company did what it could to slow the technology transfer by breaking down the manufacturing process into steps, Riley said, but "we ended up having to teach these guys how to make our state-of-the-art, world-class batteries. … And some of them are now competing with us directly."
By the end of next year, A123 expects to have two plants in Michigan employing 400 people, with plans to go up to 2,000 workers able to produce about 30,000 battery systems a year.
But what makes Chiang's ordinary-looking beige Toyota Prius even more special is that it's powered by a breakthrough battery that he invented and is working to turn into the kind of high-tech, green, "Made in America" product that many see as the key to the nation's economic future.
That's why A123 had to give in and build its first plants in China, where the company could move into production quickly to show auto industry customers that it could deliver on future contracts.
"Without question, we would rather have done it all in the U.S.," said Chiang, who left Taiwan as a 6-year-old with his family, earned degrees at MIT and has been a materials science professor there since the mid-1980s. "I'm an American citizen. We're an American company. It's an American-born technology."
Despite the obstacles, A123 and a few other advanced battery producers are building plants in Michigan and other states, thanks to massive government support that has offset Wall Street's skepticism and should help domestic producers narrow cost disadvantages with Asian rivals.
A123 is getting $250 million in aid from the Obama administration's stimulus program as well as tax incentives from Michigan. Its first U.S. plant opens in June in an abandoned brick building near Detroit that once made VHS tapes for Disney.
A123 has five plants in China, coincidentally located in Chiang's father's hometown of Changzhou, about two hours' drive west of Shanghai.
Bart Riley, an A123 co-founder and chief technology officer, figured it took about nine months to get a Chinese factory up and running, one-third the time typical for the U.S.
The quicker launch helped A123 make a name for itself through Black & Decker, which in early 2006 began putting A123 batteries in its DeWalt power tools.
Since then, A123 has been supplying batteries and battery systems for New York City buses built by Daimler, among other customers, and the company has agreements to develop products for Chrysler, Navistar and American green-car maker Fisker Automotive.
But in ramping up production in China, A123 paid an immeasurable price: loss of its intellectual property, the ideas and engineering that made its products better.
The company did what it could to slow the technology transfer by breaking down the manufacturing process into steps, Riley said, but "we ended up having to teach these guys how to make our state-of-the-art, world-class batteries. … And some of them are now competing with us directly."
By the end of next year, A123 expects to have two plants in Michigan employing 400 people, with plans to go up to 2,000 workers able to produce about 30,000 battery systems a year.
Hillhater
100 TW
Why the cut/paste history lesson ?
..is there some relavence to the issues here ?
..is there some relavence to the issues here ?
whatever
100 kW
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2010
- Messages
- 1,297
I've put up enough theories, would be great to actually know one day what really happened at a123 on this occasion.
interesting history lesson, 5 plants in china, it looks like an old article there may be many more now.
China has been allowing companies in since the early 70's, thats heading towards 50years, its well known how they operate, any transfer of manufacture to china lands up in chinese hands, or is replicated. The good part being once the chinese are competing within themselves prices go down and down.
interesting history lesson, 5 plants in china, it looks like an old article there may be many more now.
China has been allowing companies in since the early 70's, thats heading towards 50years, its well known how they operate, any transfer of manufacture to china lands up in chinese hands, or is replicated. The good part being once the chinese are competing within themselves prices go down and down.