Maybe the best answer is a mylar internal sleeve, as nothing else needs to be done about that aspect? It's what I'd do. A 2-pole device might need to be designed from scratch. The guidelines don't cover any of this, it's simply pointed out that a device where the batts can't short to earth is going to be safer. It's a reasonable point to make since there are far more metal tube mod incidents reported than boxmod incidents. Why? Could be because batts are shorting to earth. Use a sleeve.
There's a lot to get into here - probably too much for this arena. I accept that I carry a very great responsibility. Whatever I decide will be wrong according to some people. We have a saying on the ECF staff that, "ECF is never right". It means that when you please one group, another gets upset. This is a fact because ECF is so big and does so many jobs.2. If I understand what you've said correctly, you alone devised these specifications? If that is correct, I am even more concerned with their merit. Do you not see the hubris in a single man dictating the design specifications of an entire industry? And based on what? Some reports of exploding batteries and an engineering background? Not enough. Prove to me that a mod that follows these spec CAN NOT explode as you have stated. Common logic is not good enough. What made you decide 3 slots at 2x5/32 was the exact number that would allow adequate gas venting? Or was it an arbitrary guess? There are people here with backgrounds as or more impressive then your own...I think your positions need to be justified with explanation. Not necessarily laboratory testing, but how about some math?
We have stated that in June we will be promoting the EMS guidelines. There will be pain at first; but in two years time, almost everyone will be saying it was a very good thing. The person who won't agree is the sealed metal tube mod maker who wouldn't change and whose business went through the floor. I won't lose any sleep over that.
Give me a better road and I will take it.
As regards the design we could argue over some beers all night and out of a group of ten guys who had the right to contribute, no three will agree. Maybe you can see that. So, it would be possible to put together an advisory group, and that committee would come out with a compromise solution that basically would allow most of the mod makers to keep right on doing as they are... That's what committees do.
We need action right now, not next year.
The market will test the specs. We'll see.3. I'm designing a mod. For now, i'll probably ignore 2 of the 4 main parts of the spec as I see no specific justification for them. I do plan to offer a a kit at extra cost for the obsessively paranoid that allows the user to bring the mod into spec if they so choose. But I don't feel that I need to charge all my potential customers more money so that I can sell them what amounts to snake oil until it has any verification whatsoever. If you are going to dictate what is and is not safe...the testing to verify this falls on YOU and no one else. So pony up and test your specs, or make them little more than a suggestion.
Alternatively you can run some pressure tests: block the tube halfway down with an epoxy plug and ensue the plug cannot blow down the tube, then test various configurations at 200 psi in the top section. Tell me what you get, I'd be interested. But without the time and money to run such a test series and destroy a bunch of mods, what I need to do is estimate what is required. I'm happy with my estimate.
Also keep in mind it has to cope with the shortcut merchants who will wriggle and strive to get out of any specified safety features by implementing them half-heartedly - dealing with those people is as a big a job as dealing with 200 psi gas pressure.