Industry so far 'lukewarm' towards Samsung's post-Note 7 battery testing standards
Carriers and phone makers have so far largely ignored Samsung's efforts to promote its new battery testing procedure -- created in the aftermath of the fire-prone Galaxy Note 7 -- as a possible industry standard, a report said on Friday.
Those companies largely consider their existing safety procedures to be good enough, according to interviews conducted by CNET. Some are, however, said to be quietly investigating the issue of battery safety based on data Samsung shared with the public.
"I'm sure the engineers will be looking at the info Samsung made public," said a phone maker spokesman who asked CNET not to be identified. "I'm sure every [phone maker] will be doing the same."
The Samsung procedure involves eight different steps: visual inspection, an x-ray, charge/discharge, leak testing, disassembling, accelerated usage, checks for voltage changes, and finally several durability tests involving punctures, overcharging, and extreme temperature ranges.
Prior to the Note 7, Samsung reportedly relied on tests conducted by its battery suppliers, but is now conducting tests of its own as well.
One phone maker, LG, noted that its latest device -- the G6 -- went through battery puncture testing. Motorola simply said that it does internal testing, providing "an additional level beyond industry standards," and gets certification from third-party labs. TCL, which assembles Alcatel and BlackBerry devices, did acknowledge reviewing supplier methods after the Note 7 fires, but concluded it was in good shape.
For the most part there are few industry-wide battery standards, beyond limited testing done by carriers, or the requirements of groups like the CTIA, which represents companies in the U.S. wireless industry.
Apple has generally been quiet about how it tests for battery safety. It has only rarely had to deal with iPhone fire incidents, though other battery problems have occasionally crept up. Late last year, it launched a battery swap program for the iPhone 6s to cope with sudden shutdowns in some units.
Those companies largely consider their existing safety procedures to be good enough, according to interviews conducted by CNET. Some are, however, said to be quietly investigating the issue of battery safety based on data Samsung shared with the public.
"I'm sure the engineers will be looking at the info Samsung made public," said a phone maker spokesman who asked CNET not to be identified. "I'm sure every [phone maker] will be doing the same."
The Samsung procedure involves eight different steps: visual inspection, an x-ray, charge/discharge, leak testing, disassembling, accelerated usage, checks for voltage changes, and finally several durability tests involving punctures, overcharging, and extreme temperature ranges.
Prior to the Note 7, Samsung reportedly relied on tests conducted by its battery suppliers, but is now conducting tests of its own as well.
One phone maker, LG, noted that its latest device -- the G6 -- went through battery puncture testing. Motorola simply said that it does internal testing, providing "an additional level beyond industry standards," and gets certification from third-party labs. TCL, which assembles Alcatel and BlackBerry devices, did acknowledge reviewing supplier methods after the Note 7 fires, but concluded it was in good shape.
For the most part there are few industry-wide battery standards, beyond limited testing done by carriers, or the requirements of groups like the CTIA, which represents companies in the U.S. wireless industry.
Apple has generally been quiet about how it tests for battery safety. It has only rarely had to deal with iPhone fire incidents, though other battery problems have occasionally crept up. Late last year, it launched a battery swap program for the iPhone 6s to cope with sudden shutdowns in some units.
Comments
How can those battery tests address those issues if they only test batteries?
It was never made clear what the actual root cause was. I personally suspect, it was the fact they rushed a new batter size to market, did not do all the necessary testing, they implemented wireless charging along with quick rapid charging and then squeezed it into a small package. I believe it was the charging circuitry and the software they were using to charge the batter which caused the battery to go into failure condition they did not test for. I worked on failure analysis like this and it take a long time to get to actually root cause when there are so many variable. The only true way to prove you found the root cause it to fix it that one thing, then test if goes away good, but you have to remove that one fix and see if the problem reproduces. I never believe Samsung went through the process.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/01/galaxy-note-7-investigation-blames-small-battery-cases-poor-welding/
Slide 3, in particular
Theyre not telling you what the phone can do; they just spend a minute or two showing off all the equipment used to test the phones.
Nothing to test whether or not it'll explode though.
Always makes me smile when I see that advert.
Here is my issue with this report, and as I said, I have lots of experience with doing root cause failure analysis like this. All the pictures of the batteries which caught fire, the ignition points were not near the corners as they are showing in the x-ray. Some were at the edge and others in the middle or near the ends. They has failure points all over the place. The analysis trying to say the electrode (which it said was all the negative one) were bend together, shorting negative to negative does not cause a short circuit. I think the were charging the batteries way to fast and the quick heating of the battery cause minor defects like the one they showed in the other manufactures defect to accelerate to failure. All battery packs have some level of defects in the insulation layers, the question come about if the defect opens up enough to allow electrons to punch through and short to the next conductive layer.
2: Shake battery.
3: Look at battery again.
4: If battery is not on fire, approve and move to next battery.
You better believe they have their own tests.
The silver lining of the Samsung debacle is that the consumer will wake up and have an understanding that the device they keep in their pocket can explode if handled incorrectly. Plus it's not just the combustion that is dangerous, it's the fumes emitted that can kill you. We as a public never worried about batteries before with portable devices. Now even airlines are warning the public not to move their chairs when they drop their phones or tablets and get stuck between them.
We also have to understand that the battery in our devices are not a magical item that keeps your device powered all day and can keep up with phone calls, location services, and background tasks, connectivity to wifi and Bluetooth and have a bright display without ever needing a charge. Everything your iPhone does takes power to do it. Even when it's in your pocket "doing nothing". It's staying connected to a cellular tower and it might not be a tower close by if the network is busy or the closest tower isn't working. It's also talking to your email server, checking its location for any apps or system that requests it and much, much more.
When AntennaGate and BendGate occurred, Fandroids wanted Apple's head on a platter, but HEY... Samsung's exploding batteries burning down homes, and filling plane cabins with smoke?? Barely a whimper. Disgusting.
See, Fandroids are different from Samsung supporters (or fanboys whichever you would like to call them). I am a Fandroid, but not a Samsung supporter. Never owned a Samsung phone, but still a Fandroid (of Moto phones) and have an ipad air (no good quality tabs in android world, you know). It is a known fact that Samsung's flagship sales have tanked after Note 7 debacle. So the argument that Samsung has not lost anything due to Note 7 failure is not factually correct.
It is equally not correct to conclude that ALL Samsung phones pose a bomb threat to all people in the world (like people make it out in this forum). Because it is simply not true. Samsung is selling about 300 million phones (mostly mid range), but the battery failure occurred in ONLY one model among the 1000 models that Samsung produce every year.