[amsat-bb] Re: Lithium polymer batteries
mat_62 at netcommander.com
Thu Jun 24 10:20:10 PDT 2010
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Lithium polymer batteries
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:34:14 -0400
From: Michael Tondee <mat_62 at netcommander.com>
To: amsat-bb at amsat.org
Li poly batteries are perfectly safe as long as one uses common sense
and follows basic safety procedures. The fire retardant bags and clay
pots are a nice extra bit of insurance but I haven't found them really
necessary as long as I pay attention.
I charge my batteries outside mostly or if I do charge them inside I
don't leave them unattended. As someone already stated, using the proper
charger is the key. With the proper state of the art charger it is near
to impossible to overcharge a li poly battery. I emphasize "state of the
art". A very good one called the Cellpro is made by a company named FMA
and is under $100 in price.
I fly electric RC airplanes and helicopters with Li poly batteries. I
order them online and I have never been charged any type of hazmat fee.
FWIW I've had numerous hard crashes with my heli and have never ever
had a li poly battery explode or catch fire.
These batteries have revolutionized RC flying. Along with brushless
motors, it's a whole new world. It's now possible to fly planes of the
size that used to take nitromethane or "glow fuel" powered engines with
clean quiet electric power.
On 6/24/2010 10:01 AM, whiteld at usa.net wrote:
> Following up on the Lithium polymer battery mention I Googled them and was
> disturbed to find:
> -high fire risk. One seller offers flame retardant bags to put the cells in
> while charging them... for $25
> -(as warned) high prices especially considering the more-unique balanced
> charger / discharger devices at ~$100 and up being required in addition to the
> cells themselves
> -a hazardous materials uplift for FedEx shipment ranging from $25-$45
> depending on destination, on top of normal shipping rates
> All of that tells me they're "not ready for prime time" though the current
> capacity vs weight looks very promising.
> I will wait and watch, hoping the technology matures into something safer and
> less costly as time goes on. Likely it will, particularly the cheaper part,
> though it appears some safety issues have to be addressed meaningfully.
> Thanks for the mention. It is interesting.
More information about the AMSAT-BB