Regarding ECF Safety Specification For Metal Tube Mods

**rolygate** · 03-04-2012, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by warlike36

Since ECF has detailed info on the failures/explosions, why not post the info...like batteries and units involved ? And any and all pertinent info ?

Is there info that may help me avoid those same conditions ?

I would like to know and think it would help me as a consumer and user of mods.

This whole thing is about telling you what to buy, what to avoid, and keeping you safe. That is entirely what this is about and it has no point otherwise. What you are looking at here in this thread is a debate about the precise details. I'm trying to answer questions about why ECF needs to warn buyers and why we need to put pressure on the industry to do something about this situation. You already have plenty of info about what batteries to use because I have spent a fair proportion of the last 18 months ensuring you have that information - just follow any of the battery warnings pasted all over ECF.

Currently, all you need to know is posted in the stickies in Announcements. Please read the Announcements section because part of its purpose is to keep you safe. Briefly:

1. Some types of metal tube mods with two batteries fitted have a history of explosions and rocket-mode fails.

2. No other type of mod is involved.

3. You might want to avoid what looks like a gas-tight sealed metal tube mod with two batteries unless the manufacturer can prove to you that it cannot explode.

4. A metal tube mod of any kind with large slots or holes distributed along the length of the body cannot explode as it is physically impossible for it to do so. Therefore, it doesn't matter if it runs one or two cells.

5. Don't buy unprotected Li-ion batteries, no matter what anyone anywhere tells you - they cannot possibly be described as safe. They are almost always the culprit in mod explosions. There is a school of thought that they are always the culprit, because other types that seemed to be involved were in fact counterfeits: a safer type of cell was replaced by a counterfeit Li-ion cell with a false label, bought as a result of fraud.

**markfm** · 03-04-2012, 03:27 PM

I meant weak relative to the tube, unless someone was going overboard on thickness. Also, mylar is being used in the generic sense, like calling a tissue a kleenex.

**rolygate** · 03-04-2012, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by cbrociuos

ill take a stab at this one.

let me preface this by saying, i believe all the pertinent info has been put out there w/o naming specific vendors.

im guessing that some of the info they have on "potentially dangerous" mods are from forum suppliers, people that pay to advertise here. so instead of publicly calling out a vendor, they are doing it "behind closed doors" so to speak.

It is easy to find the majority of the explosive and rocket-mode fails because most of the ones we have good details for were reported on ECF. You can find about 75% of these incidents by searching. Some are hard to find, though. However, some were never reported except privately by customers to a vendor.

The truth is, you don't need to know which mods were involved (other than that are always sealed metal tubes that can take two batteries), and the reason for this is:

A new mod never before reported exploding is involved with every new incident.

In other words, it isn't the same offender again and again. If only it was.

Up to now it is always a metal tube mod that can take two batteries, that appears to be fairly gas-tight, and that has no electronics.

The way it is beginning to look is that many sealed-looking metal tube mods that can take two batteries could be involved one day - so you probably don't want to be the person that 'introduces' another mod to the list.

It is absolutely pointless naming the exploding mods because the way it is going, most or all of them (of the vulnerable type) will go up one day. Given enough time it looks as if there will be a long list of mods that will experience an explosion or rocket-mode fail.

All sealed-looking metal tube mods that can take two cells are "potentially dangerous" in your words (with which I agree). This is the problem we are trying to fix.

A mod with large holes in it can't explode, so it would not be included in a 'potentially dangerous' list. It may well burn your hand, but it is expecting too much to get out of an energetic two-battery failure event without harm. There is no guaranteed way to do that.

If you already have a sealed metal tube mod, then this is what you can do to minimize risk:

- Only use one large battery
- Check the battery on a voltmeter immediately it comes off charge
- Fit an internal sleeve in your mod - plastic sheet cut to size might be OK
- Alternatively, tape the battery up
- Have a machine shop drill a series of holes along the body in either two or three rows (not just one row)
- The holes need to extend from the top end down to the bottom end - holes just at the bottom will not always work
- If it's a real machine shop, ask them about milling some slots along the body as per the EMSS spec

**rolygate** · 03-04-2012, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by tj99959

There is no reason to, ground is ground. Even if you did run a ground wire for for ever ckt, you would still have to ground the chassis.

Yes. This is what is done when all circuits use an insulated negative return.

The prime example is in marine engineering, where doing it wrong has catastrophic results. All negative returns are insulated and the chassis is grounded. Of course in some structures it will be found that the builder cut costs and used the chassis as a negative return, and this can cause problems.

**rolygate** · 03-04-2012, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Doomed!

If I may. In this thread, http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ry-2012-a.html ecf has said that there are 8 cases of reported explosions and "perhaps" a total of 15 cases including some that went unreported. My question is: with all of the tube mods out there with the capability of stacked batteries, is a potential for 15 cases of explosions significant enough for this kind of action? That's 15 cases out of how many mods used? 1,000? 10,000? More, maybe? What percentage are we talking about? Yes, a catastrophic failure in a mod that leads to an explosion is a concern. Someone suffering an injury is problematic. But before we start declaring that the sky is falling, shouldn't we find out if this is a problem that requires this kind of solution? You can't protect everyone. Even with the ecf approved safety measures in place, batteries will fail and people will get hurt. Those events will always happen. Is 15 explosions out of ? mods over an untold period of time significant, or is just random events that will occur with or without safety measures?

As is usual with the e-cigarette industry, the problem has been left so long without action that we are now at the cliff edge.

Please ask your CASAA rep what will happen in the media if there is a continuing succession of mod explosions. Ask them what it will do to their work in resisting e-cigarette bans when every State committee throws the exploding mods issue in their face? Put this question at the next CASAA open meet (next Sunday): how will it affect the thousands of hours work you do protecting our rights if mods explode with increasing frequency?

I expect you support your regional community consumer association otherwise you have no dog in this fight. People who don't care if ecigs are banned don't have a role in this discussion.

p.s. This does not refer to you, Doomed, it specifically refers to people who want to come on here and argue about this and they don't even support their consumer org. We put in thousands of hours of unpaid work to protect your rights (I am the national secretary of one of them).

**pumasforpets** · 03-04-2012, 03:52 PM

Thank you rolygate for your participation in this thread. It's good for the community to be able to discuss something like this.

2 things. It has come to my attention that large slots puts the battery casing at greater risk of becoming damaged by things in the user's pocket such as keys and change. Cutting slots may in fact increase the likelihood of a battery failure. A sleeve obviously reduces the risk.

I still feel the need to know from where the 2in x 5/32 x 3+ came. I think an exact spec like that can not be arbitrary.

**SteelJan** · 03-04-2012, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by rolygate

You are absolutely correct. It is unlikely we would make such a direct statement. However we will certainly do everything but that.

Yes, you are correct. It would probably be going too far to state that any given mod is dangerous because it does not conform to EMS. But we will certainly promote EMS as strongly as possible without direct statements that non-conforming mods are dangerous. It's our duty to the community to go as far as we possibly can to fix this situation.

I've posted this elsewhere but I'll post it again, as a link:
Local NW Floridian with severe injuries from exploding ecig battery

ECF has the good fortune to be run by an engineer of over 40 year's experience in different areas of engineering. There are people here who have a better knowledge of electronics or machining. There can't be many people around here who have the vast amount of all-round engineering experience I do. There are certainly people here who could make far better electronic doodads, or much better machined widgets. There are probably electronic geniuses and exceptionally-good toolmakers here. But are there people who have my experience?

Well - perhaps there are. In which case they would know what I know: it will go wrong, even when people have swore to you that it cannot possibly fail. The most important law in engineering is that it will go wrong: a chain of 'impossible' failures will happen at the same time, and that time will be the worst possible time; and YOUR JOB AS AN ENGINEER, IF YOU WANT TO CALL YOURSELF THAT, IS TO PROTECT THE USER OF YOUR WIDGET. Because it will go wrong, and it WILL be your fault if the user gets hurt. Not the user's fault as some would have you believe.

If anyone who makes stuff says that it's the user's fault if they get hurt, you can write them off as an engineer. They are a bodger making lash-ups. Sorry but it's true. Do the guys who build the plane you fly on say it's your fault if it kills you? Wake up. It's ALWAYS the builder's fault if a device harms you when it fails.

When a device cannot be built to be harmless in the event of a fail, it is the maker's responsibility to minimize that harm. That is the law of engineering and anyone who says different isn't an engineer - simple as that.

You hit it right on the head Roly. As an engineer with over 30 years experience I would like to add that in industry, a design must be minimum 100% over spec for safety if the thing is going to consumers or be used by the general public. E.g. if it's supposed to be good for 3Amps, it should be designed for 6Amps, if it's supposed to support a 1 ton load, it should be designed for a minimum of 2 tons. And don't get me started on testing and quality control (see my latest video series on Ecig Future Design Ideas).

If I build a mod for myself and it fails and hurts me, too bad so sad. But if a mod maker or company builds and sells a mod to someone else and it fails and hurts the user, the modder or company is faulted, sometimes even if the user does not follow instructions, especially if it looks too easy for the user to have made that mistake by common sense reasoning.