New York Post and a deadly vape pen

[Mooch]

No and who would? But if it wasn't tested, then the cell might explode, right? Of course it might. And do you want it to explode in your face? Of course not. And using Mooch's recommendations, your battery could reach 150°F or higher.

Is Efest one of those compliant cell manufactures? I don't recall them having any spec sheets. And I have the one for the Samsung 25R. There is no mention of any heat test, except the max temperature the cell gets when excessively charging or discharging.

Okay thanks for the correction. I recall two months for something, I thought it was this. And I recall they don't release freshly manufactured cells for at least the first 2 months. Or is this wrong too?

You can’t heat test a cell to see if it might explode and then sell it. It would be badly damaged at the temperatures needed to test for thermal runaway. Makes no sense too as some failure mechanisms aren’t heat related. If the cell is known to have poor process control during assembly then you could possibly test for the internal defects, from contamination, that can force a cell into runaway by cycling the cell. Perhaps at high temperatures to encourage internal short-circuiting. Makes no sense though, just improve the process so the failure rate is astoundingly low. Then test for other failure modes as is required for shipping and for some customers.

With great process control, which these small China factories don’t even come close to having, you only need to test samples of your cells as required by the safety standards. There’s no need to stress test every single cell, trying to see which might explode. Do you know how hard it is to clean that mess up? Putting thousands of cells into a room and cleaning up after the ones you forced into runaway because of the internal defects your poor process control caused is a truly insane idea. Just replacing the jigs used for the testing, wiping down all the surfaces, the work required goes on and on. The major manufacturers don’t need to do this because of their good process control and their testing to the safety standards.

Cells don’t explode if not tested. That assumes that testing can somehow find a cell that might eventually go into thermal runaway due to an internal defect. This can’t be done except for the most uselessly constructed cells. Attempting this is insanity versus using good process control to bring the defect rate down to the level that 18650’s have now from the big manufacturers, about 1 in 1,000,000 cells or better. This low defect rate does not mean the rare cell blows up, it could just self-discharge quickly. It just means an internal defect.

All of the large manufacturers test to the UN38.3 safety standard and most test to IEC62133, UL1642, or a similar standard. UN38.3 testing is required for most shipping methods for cells sent without the equipment they might power. Every manufacturer should have had their cells tested to UN38.3 to allow for any type of shipping.

Both the spec sheet and tech info presentation document for the 25R have some of the results for these tests. The complete test reports are not included in the spec sheet as they are separate documents and only a Letter of Conformity is typically requested by the customer.

 

[Punk In Drublic]

As far as I am aware Efest is not a cell manufacture – they re-wrap other cells. As for tests from other manufactures – no idea why this is not publicly available. Or maybe it is, and we are just looking in the wrong places. But my understanding is these tests are required to ensure the cells are compliant. I will let @Mooch or @Baditude elaborate more on this. But some can be found – Samsung 30Q spec sheet displays heat and impact tests along with others.

I could not find the spec sheets identifying these tests for the Aspire cells either – but will admit I did not put much effort into looking.

Edit: Just noticed @Mooch answered much of what was required. Slow Monday morning…still working on my first coffee

 

[BillW50]

You can’t heat test a cell to see if it might explode and then sell it. It would be badly damaged at the temperatures needed to test for thermal runaway. Makes no sense too as some failure mechanisms aren’t heat related. If the cell is known to have poor process control during assembly then you could possibly test for the internal defects, from contamination, that can force a cell into runaway by cycling the cell. Perhaps at high temperatures to encourage internal short-circuiting. Makes no sense though, just improve the process so the failure rate is astoundingly low. Then test for other failure modes as is required for shipping and for some customers.

With great process control, which these small China factories don’t even come close to having, you only need to test samples of your cells as required by the safety standards. There’s no need to stress test every single cell, trying to see which might explode. Do you know how hard it is to clean that mess up? Putting thousands of cells into a room and cleaning up after the ones you forced into runaway because of the internal defects your poor process control caused is a truly insane idea. Just replacing the jigs used for the testing, wiping down all the surfaces, the work required goes on and on. The major manufacturers don’t need to do this because of their good process control and their testing to the safety standards.

Cells don’t explode if not tested. That assumes that testing can somehow find a cell that might eventually go into thermal runaway due to an internal defect. This can’t be done except for the most uselessly constructed cells. Attempting this is insanity versus using good process control to bring the defect rate down to the level that 18650’s have now from the big manufacturers, about 1 in 1,000,000 cells or better. This low defect rate does not mean the rare cell blows up, it could just self-discharge quickly. It just means an internal defect.

All of the large manufacturers test to the UN38.3 safety standard and most test to IEC62133, UL1642, or a similar standard. UN38.3 testing is required for most shipping methods for cells sent without the equipment they might power. Every manufacturer should have had their cells tested to UN38.3 to allow for any type of shipping.

Both the spec sheet and tech info presentation document for the 25R have some of the results for these tests. The complete test reports are not included in the spec sheet as they are separate documents and only a Letter of Conformity is typically requested by the customer.

View attachment 799027 View attachment 799029

Nobody said to put each cell into thermal runaway and then turn around and sell them. In the PBusardo's video, humans could walk into that room. So how hot could it be? Maybe 150°F tops? You just need enough heat to allow for expansion. This is where those Samsung Galaxy Note 7 batteries failed. If Samsung did the same with their batteries, they would have caught those batteries instead of allowing them to blow up in the user's hands or pocket.

Sure doing certain tests on every cell may degrade performance. But what are you after, a safer cell or a high performing cell? Take your pick. I myself rather give up performance for safer anyday.

Remember what Jay Whitacre said, a professor of materials science and engineering at Carnegie Mellon University, told Wired in 2015: "There is no way to tell when buying, since the catastrophic failure likely will not manifest until the battery is fully charged and discharged several times."

And I say why allow the user to get the cell passed this point? Why not have the manufacture get it pass this critical time?

 

[BillW50]

As far as I am aware Efest is not a cell manufacture – they re-wrap other cells.

First how would you know if your Efest cell is a Sony or a Panasonic? And even if you knew what type it is, guess what? Efest buys rejected cells that failed to be good enough by the manufacture. This is why even if you had the manufacture's data sheet, it is still worthless. Why they didn't meet the manufacture's standards, who knows? But Efest doesn't care. And many vape shops sells them and some vapers use them.

 

[charlie1465]

First how would you know if your Efest cell is a Sony or a Panasonic? And even if you knew what type it is, guess what? Efest buys rejected cells that failed to be good enough by the manufacture. This is why even if you had the manufacture's data sheet, it is still worthless. Why they didn't meet the manufacture's standards, who knows? But Efest doesn't care. And many vape shops sells them and some vapers use them.

Bill...IMO you're confusing rejection with safety. The rejected cells are sold because they are still safe but have probably been tested as under par in another area. For example Mah or CDR.

Correct me if i'm wrong but a faiilure in these areas does not imply that they are less safe than other passed cells....eg, Sony produces an 18650 vt6 which is supposed to have a cdr of 15A and a Mah at 2500 and they fail to come up to that standard and acheive say 14A and 2000 mah. This gets them rejected but not for any safety concerns....hence the resale.

So a re wrap is not an unsafe cell but rather an unknown quantity which is presumably why @Mooch test's them.

 

[BillW50]

Bill...IMO you're confusing rejection with safety. The rejected sells are sold because they are still safe but have probably been tested as under par in another area. For example Mah or CDR.

Correct me if i'm wrong but a faiilure in these areas does not imply that they are less safe than other passed cells....eg, Sony produces an 18650 vt6 which is supposed to have a cdr of 15A and a Mah at 2500 and they fail to come up to that standard and acheive say 14A and 2000 mah. This gets them rejected but not for any safety concerns....hence the resale.

Sure, but do you know why they failed to meet standards? No, only Efest and the manufacture knows. Efest could be purchasing cells that are meant to be only recycled for all we know.

So a re wrap is not an unsafe sell but rather an unknown quantity which is presumably why @Mooch test's them.

What Mooch tests for a rewrap (like Efest) doesn't mean you are getting the same type as the one he tested. As he could of tested a Efest Sony and you bought an Efest Panasonic. Nor do we know why it wasn't up to standards. Mooch could test one that has lower than rated capacity and you may have purchased one where the plates are too close and on one warm day it goes BOOM!

 

[charlie1465]

Sure, but do you know why they failed to meet standards? No, only Efest and the manufacture knows. Efest could be purchasing cells that are meant to be only recycled for all we know.

If they were unsafe and defective in that sense then Sony or whoever would bin them. They are clearly safe for resale and run you absolutely no extra risk excepting the overrating which happens with most if not all the companies tested.

Mooch could test one that has lower than rated capacity and you may have purchased one where the plates are too close and on one warm day it goes BOOM!

Sorry but this is exactly what is meant by fear mongering! As i have already stated the batteries would not be sold if they were unsafe no matter which company they came from. All you suffer from is a potentially worse performance. And any way @Mooch's tests show us that we should buy the cells direct from the manufactures so each vaper has the choice

 

[BillW50]

If they were unsafe and defective in that sense then Sony or whoever would bin them. They are clearly safe for resale and run you absolutely no extra risk excepting the overrating which happens with most if not all the companies tested.

If they were safe, why are there so many shipping restrictions on them? Think about it. And companies bin their bad cells by selling them to be recycled. And how do you know Efest isn't just rewrapping them instead?

Sorry but this is exactly what is meant by fear mongering! As i have already stated the batteries would not be sold if they were unsafe no matter which company they came from. All you suffer from is a potentially worse performance. And any way @Mooch's tests show us that we should buy the cells direct from the manufactures so each vaper has the choice

Samsung sold batteries that were unsafe. Sony also sold batteries that were unsafe too. So saying they won't isn't true at all. Maybe it is true they won't knowingly sell unsafe cells. And every case of a vape battery exploding, Efest comes up more often than not. Think about it.

 

[charlie1465]

If they were safe, why are there so many shipping restrictions on them? Think about it. And companies bin their bad cells by selling them to be recycled. And how do you know Efest isn't just rewrapping them instead?

Samsung sold batteries that were unsafe. Sony also sold batteries that were unsafe too. So saying they won't isn't true at all. Maybe it is true they won't knowingly sell unsafe cells. And every case of a vape battery exploding, Efest comes up more often than not. Think about it.

Your confusing 100% safety with acceptable levels of safety

A lot of things come with some risk which is why they have to be utilised in the correct manner and some simple rules followed to try and mitigate any potential danger.

Mitigation is the reason for flight regulation on batteries and makes complete sense when you realise the potential (all be it extremely rare) effect an event would have. However there is less chance of this happening than than winning the lottery.

Again re wraps are like all batteries...safe if used correctly just like all batteries

 

[BillW50]

Again re wraps are like all batteries...safe if used correctly just like all batteries

That is what I am saying, that isn't true. Batteries come in different grades. And the lowest grade is very likely not as safe as a top grade battery. And some say they won't buy batteries that were manufactured from a Chinese battery factory. I don't go that far, but some do. You somehow believe any vape battery is just as safe as the next one. And this isn't true whatsoever. And not all exploding batteries are due to user error. Sometimes it is due to a manufacturing error.

 

[charlie1465]

You somehow believe any vape battery is just as safe as the next one. And this isn't true whatsoever. And not all exploding batteries are due to user error. Sometimes it is due to a manufacturing error.

I am not saying there is no risk but that the risk is acceptable and the differences that you may find in re wraps as compared to the 'big suppliers' has no statistical significance that means you should avoid them.

 

[BillW50]

I am not saying there is no risk but that the risk is acceptable and the differences that you may find in re wraps as compared to the 'big suppliers' has no statistical significance that means you should avoid them.

Oh but you are wrong. There is a statistical significance and Efest batteries comes up all of the time when a lithium cell explodes. More times than not, it was an Efest. There was even a case of a seller who sold a vaper an Efest battery and the seller lost in court (2 mil + expenses) because the vaper's lawyer proved Efest are shady batteries.

The batteries originated with a Chinese company named E-fest, which purchases lower-grade batteries from companies such as Sony and Panasonic, Morgan said. R-L Sales, which is based in Utah, imports them from China and sells them online, he added.

R-L Sales had a duty to adequately test the batteries in vaporizers to ensure they did not present a danger. It was negligent in failing to do that, the suit states.​

Gainesville man wins $2M verdict after e-cigarette explodes in his mouth

 

[stols001]

All batteries have the potential to blow up. They ALL do, really and truly.

I'm not saying any ONE is more likely than others (although it's potentially quite true) but I really sort of don't understand the focus on ONE over another.

The can all blow up, in fact there are well known WAYS for them to blow up.

I don't use efest batteries. I also don't use Aspire's. I'm "meh" on Goli due to the difficulty of getting them sometimes.

But fixating ONLY on rewraps is doing a disservice in my opinion. You can have the very best battery in the world and misuse it. Fact..

Anna

 

[Punk In Drublic]

The lawyer proved that the battery should not have been sold for the purpose of vaping. This does not prove the battery was at fault. What is missing from that article is the reason why it blew up. There are many articles describing almost identical lawsuits against other battery manufactures. Not sticking up for Efest, but there is no statistical evidence that demonstrates one manufacture (re-wrap or OEM) is more prone to defects over another.

Efest is also not the only re-wrap company. If other re-wraps are buying from the same OEM’s then logically, they are just as prone to the same manufacturing defects.

 

[Eskie]

Shipping restrictions are the same on Sony or Samsung A grade batteries as a no name. The restrictions are understandable in light of the catastrophic failure that would occur for the exceedingly rare situation of an internal fault while in transit in a cargo bay.

Rewrappers are required to provide safety and materials documentation which in their case is from the original manufacturer. I'd they change cans under the wrapper they're required by law to provide updated documention to reflect that. As Mooch has pointed out he will no longer review any battery from a company that will not provide that basic information. Sounds fair to me as at least some basis of holding the rewrappers responsible for their products. Would I buy a rebranded battery? No, but as they're not disappearing because they won't get my miniscule amount of business doesn't mean the vaping community can ignore their existence and no one's making them go away short of campaigns to boycott anything from a vendor that sells those items. And let's face reality, that's not happening.

As to the specific types of batteries we use, the 18650 now 20x series, that stuff of in my Ryobi cordless drill power pack along with every other cordless type of home maintenance or construction equipment. I've never read of any of them spontaneously exploding, although I'm sure it has, it just doesn't get any press coverage as it's not as sexy a headline as vaper blows up. I expect all those things you buy in Home Depot are assembled in China but you are relying on those companies warranties and don't have the slightest idea of what's really inside that pack. Same for the old swappable laptop battery packs, which I don't think anyone sells anymore as laptops have gotten far too thin to use that stuff anymore (granted not a high current pack to begin with). I'm not saying rewraps are therefore all as safe as a genuine A Samsung, but we subject ourselves to the same sorts of risks when we use devices requiring higher voltage battery packs or in the vape world, internal batteries. Not all of which are Lipos. There were some eLeaf smaller mods that if you took them apart they just had an 18650 in there you could swap out if it no longer held a charge

One other point that is always brought up is how these were never meant for end users and should only be assembled in a package with a BMS. A BMS is not exactly a fancy electronic product. It's pretty straightforward and inexpensive. The specs are cutoffs for ovdr/under voltage, balanced charging and discharging, and a cap on current draw limiting amps according to the specs of the pack, based on the batteries in it.

If those functions sound familiar it's because that's essentially what a regulated mod does, or should do. So in essence of a mod maker builds a proper board with decent reliable safety features we're using those batteries in a BMS environment once we pop the loose cans in. The risks with regulated mod use will arise from either an internal fault in the battery, which can happen anywhere even with a BMS in place, or if the BMS doesn't do its job well. How often have we seen cheap boards with corners cut to be competitive which don't balance discharge and charge our batteries? Or fail to properly limit draw? I feel those mod manufacturers are as bad as a rewrap battery company when they shortchange those basic safety requirements. The community needs to hold those folks responsible just as we point fingers at Efest and the lot.

 

[BillW50]

The lawyer proved that the battery should not have been sold for the purpose of vaping. This does not prove the battery was at fault. What is missing from that article is the reason why it blew up.

When R-L Sales is charged 2M+ and the battery was not at fault, something is seriously wrong! It was shown that "E-fest, which purchases lower-grade batteries" was the reason. Is this the kind of battery vapers should be using? Absolutely not. Vapers should only be using high grade batteries if you value your life. And if you sell vape batteries, you should not be selling lower grade batteries to vapers period.

 

[ScottP]

But fixating ONLY on rewraps is doing a disservice in my opinion. You can have the very best battery in the world and misuse it. Fact..

Efest is also not the only re-wrap company. If other re-wraps are buying from the same OEM’s then logically, they are just as prone to the same manufacturing defects.

My problem with rewraps is that you do not know what you are getting and the numbers provided by the rewrap company are often wrong or inflated. If you buy a Samsung 30A battery and build a coil that draws 25A max you can be reasonably assured it will be fine. If a user gets a rewrap that claims it's a 30A battery and builds a coil that draws 25A but the REAL battery underneath is only a 20A battery, now you have a problem. There are even rewraps that claim they are a 40A battery, BUT 40A 18650's do NOT really exist. Not only that but they also often inflate the mAh ratings of the batteries so you are not really getting what you are paying for.

Would you go to a car dealership and buy a car that was hidden from view and you couldn't know the brand, make, model, and specifications? What about a cell phone? What about a computer? Then why on Earth would you buy an unknown battery?

 

[BillW50]

Shipping restrictions are the same on Sony or Samsung A grade batteries as a no name. The restrictions are understandable in light of the catastrophic failure that would occur for the exceedingly rare situation of an internal fault while in transit in a cargo bay.

Yes, you and I understand this, but according to charlie1465...

Again re wraps are like all batteries...safe if used correctly just like all batteries

As to the specific types of batteries we use, the 18650 now 20x series, that stuff of in my Ryobi cordless drill power pack along with every other cordless type of home maintenance or construction equipment. I've never read of any of them spontaneously exploding, although I'm sure it has, it just doesn't get any press coverage as it's not as sexy a headline as vaper blows up.

Well talk to Edward Denison here. He had seen plenty of battery packs explode on a construction site. And sometimes they do tell you what kind of batteries used in a power pack.

One other point that is always brought up is how these were never meant for end users and should only be assembled in a package with a BMS. A BMS is not exactly a fancy electronic product. It's pretty straightforward and inexpensive. The specs are cutoffs for ovdr/under voltage, balanced charging and discharging, and a cap on current draw limiting amps according to the specs of the pack, based on the batteries in it.

I hear this all of the time and it is generally true, but not always. For example, Aspire batteries are not designed for battery packs, but for electronic cigarettes. There are probably some other battery manufactures out there too which manufacture batteries for vapers.

 

[stols001]

I agree that rewraps are more dangerous because abusing them becomes almost inevitable if you are unlucky and a high wattage vaper. Do not get me wrong and I don't buy or use rewraps. Even though it would have to take a genuinely HORRIFIC battery for me to get into trouble with one.

I'm just saying that's far from all of it. I mean, a torn wrap on a great battery can be as catastrophic as misusing a rewrapped battery and overstraining it.

I'm just saying it's not all rewraps and focusing on one thing over another does ignore the inherent risk in all vaping which like, we should all be mindful of. Over focusing on the rewrap part can lead to a false sense of safety. I mean, you should have seen the state of my wraps before I discovered all the goodness in "battery safety 101." They weren't good, and I had NO idea .Etc.

Anna

 

[Punk In Drublic]

For the record I am not promoting nor am I defending a re-wrap cell. They should not be on the market…period!! But one news article with little information on how the explosion happened is not conclusive enough to point a finger at a cell being a fault.

Should we use top grade batteries? Absolutely!!! And anyone who has taken note of my past posts can clearly see that this is something that I have always advised and stressed. But using top grade batteries does not void ANYONE from mishaps, and @BillW50, you KNOW this first hand. Fortunately, you came out unscathed. But the same cannot be said for every situation that involves user error or neglect.

I am more than aware of over rated batteries from re-wrappers. I am also aware of any false securities this can give an end user. But overrated wraps are not the only problem here and to ignore all other problems is just foolish.