Testing venting... Enjoy!
- Thread starter Icey
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Battery safety is no joke. I was very concerned for the yellow gumdrop during the actual venting process!!
A classic IMR/INR venting. 
Luckily, thermal runaway is tough to reach with Samsung/Sony/LG cells (which MXJO uses) unless you really apply a very low resistance short circuit. Even then it often doesn't happen and you just get venting....luckily.
Luckily, thermal runaway is tough to reach with Samsung/Sony/LG cells (which MXJO uses) unless you really apply a very low resistance short circuit. Even then it often doesn't happen and you just get venting....luckily.
I would like to merely point out that the gas was escaping from the top or positive pole of the battery when it vented. This is why I believe it is extremely important (especially in a mechanical mod) for mods to have their vent holes in the top of the mod. Many of the battery compartments in mods are extremely tight fitting, allowing little to no room for the gas to escape to any bottom vent holes. If not allowed to escape, the rapid accumulation of gas inside of the metal tube can become a pipe bomb. If you look at pictures of mods which have exploded, the top of the mod has blown off.
Today's safer chemistry batteries are not likely to explode or burst into flames like ICR or LiPo batteries, but they do release quite a bit of gas. So the main danger is of inadequate ventilation holes in our mods.
Today's safer chemistry batteries are not likely to explode or burst into flames like ICR or LiPo batteries, but they do release quite a bit of gas. So the main danger is of inadequate ventilation holes in our mods.
Unless the mechanical mod is explicitly designed to vent from the bottom. In which case, so long as wrap integrity is verified, logic presumes correctly that cells ought to be oriented with the positive down for safer operation.
Last edited:
Most mechs have vent holes at the bottom only but still designed to have the battery positive up.
Sent from my M7_PLUS using Tapatalk
I disagree. The vast majority of mech mods have their vent holes in the bottom of the body cylinder or in the battery cap/fireswitch, and are designed for the battery orientation to be positive up. Having vent holes in these places are not logical. The battery itself may block access to the vent holes, allowing accumulating gas to build up enough pressure to cause the body of the mod to explode.
Last edited:
Absolutely agreed. However, for the vast majority of mech mods (if not all), it matters not how the cell(s) are oriented (so long as orientation remains congruent for multiple cell applications). From singles, duals, triples and beyond, if wrap integrity is first verified, cell(s) oriented with the positive facing the direction of available venting is a fair proposition. I am not in opposition to your statements. But when I see members drilling supplementary vent holes in their mods when they could have simply inverted their cell(s), I feel obligated to provide a counterpoint.
Last edited:
Bad idea (no pun intended):
To my understanding, reversing the direction of the battery cell might cause problems. Normally, the body of the mech mod is the ground or negative charge. When you reverse the polarity of the battery to the mod, the body of the mech now becomes positively charged.
Warning: battery reverse polarity in APVs
Reversed battery polarity in mechs
"Why do people want to insert batteries the wrong way round?
Perhaps because a battery that fails will vent first from the positive end - you can see the tiny gas vents around the positive terminal at the top. All rechargeables have these. Maybe the device being used only has gas vents at the bottom, so that the user assumes that it will be safer if the battery pos terminal is by the tubemod's gas vent.
There are so many faults in this reasoning that it is futile listing them and would take too much space. Just don't do it." ---Rolygate, ECF Forum administrator and battery expert.
Last edited:
Might. If cell wraps are compromised and steel cylinders are exposed to make contact with the positively charged body, then yes. If cell wraps are not compromised and there is no negative exposure to create a short, then no.
I'll make a final comment and then I'm finished with this topic.
Everyone is free to choose to what degree they practice safe vaping habits. You provided a solution to mod vent holes being in the wrong location by reversing battery orientation. I provided a different approach and also provided two resources which contradict your solution as not being recommended.
We'll let the readers choose which method they think is best. Have a nice day.
Disappointing. Skipped through 5 minutes of drivel only to NOT see explosion. If there is that much talk of danger, at least show something catastrophic.
As Bad (and Others) have mentioned, this is Not a good idea.
They say a Picture is worth 1,000 Words. Its too early to do a 1,000 Word Post.
Thankyou for posting the pic zoiDman, a few times ive explained to people that -neg to atty isnt a good idea and now i dont need to explain
The good thing displayed in the clip was the safe chemistry battery (INR) was the battery did not explode or burst into flames. This is why we recommend using only IMR or INR chemistry batteries.
The one bad thing displayed in the clip, the battery did exactly what is predicted --- it vented all of its energy in the form of gas, instead of exploding or flaming. The danger in this is if the mechanical mod has inadequate venting, the metal tube (mod body) then becomes a pipe bomb from the accumulating gas.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
