Safety Fix for Boeing Batteries

Monday, March 18, 2013 @ 06:03 PM gHale


Boeing outlined plans to improve the safety features and performance of the batteries used in its 787 aircraft, after two of the planes experienced on-board incidents at Takamatsu and Boston.

Something caused the batteries on two 787s to become very hot, but why that happened is not entirely known yet, but the company hinted a “deep discharge” event occurred in one cell of the planes’ batteries, heating it to the point at which it vented so much hot electrolyte that an adjacent cell warmed and also vented. A manufacturing fault seems to be the reason such an event was able to occur and the company outlined three key improvements to stop this from happening again.

RELATED STORIES
Emerson CHARMS SIS Certified
Safety Solution gets Big Upgrade
SIF Interoperability Test Kit Updated
Chemical Safety Starts in Classroom

Mike Sinnett, a Boeing vice president and chief project engineer for the battery fix, pointed out that losing batter power won’t mean a nasty end for a 787 flight, as the batteries operate for mere seconds in flight and even then only as bridges between other multiply-redundant power sources in the event the main power source isn’t working. The batteries do the bulk of their work on the ground, powering systems when the in-flight generators aren’t available.

On the flights where the problems occurred, “the cells vented,” Sinnett said, “and the venting is a protective measure that when something happens in a battery cell the pressure and the heat can build up inside that cell. We vent the cell to prevent the pressure from building up too high and to keep the temperature down.”

“This is what happened in the [Japanese] Takamatsu and the [Boston’s airport] Logan event. The heat from the cell propagated to other cells and they vented as well. This is a protective mechanism that is designed into the battery cells.”

But when the batteries vent, they leak vaporized electrolyte which looks like smoke. Sinnett insisted the visible vapors were “not the product of combustion [and] not the result of a fire.” Once the batteries vented, he said, all other systems worked as planned with flight crews notified after smoke detectors worked. The vaporized electrolyte jettisoned overboard, so it never posed a risk to passengers or crew.

Sinnett said he cannot call the event a “thermal runaway,” and that Boeing’s batteries have four levels of protection against the only known catalyst of such an event, namely overcharging. Sinnett said he is “very confident” Boeing has “never seen overcharging” in the 787 fleet. He also said he is content that Boeing’s suppliers – GS Yuasa makes the batteries and Thales the charger – aren’t at fault.

Both have nonetheless redesigned their contributions to the 787. GS Yuasa will “develop and institute enhanced production standards and tests to further reduce any possibility for variation in the production of the individual cells as well as the overall battery.” The battery box will acquire new insulation and isolation features and reside in a new stainless steel enclosure. All components will work in a newly-narrowed “acceptable level of charge for the battery” they will achieve “both by lowering the highest charge allowed and raising the lower level allowed for discharge.”

Another change will see “The battery charger … adapted to soften the charging cycle to put less stress on the battery during charging.”

All of these changes need certification before the 787 will fly again. Boeing said it is working to earn those certifications as fast as is practicable.



Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.