[amsat-bb] Re: Lithium polymer batteries

Michael Tondee 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.
Michael, W4HIJ
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.
>  Lowell
>  K9LDW
>  _______________________________________________
>  S

More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list