4 ms·
With batteries (and even small battery packs) there are two main safety issues: (1) chemical combustion (due to mechanical damage or stress or electrical stress
by dom0 9y ago
With batteries (and even small battery packs) there are two main safety issues: (1) chemical combustion (due to mechanical damage or stress or electrical stress i.e. over-charging) (2) Burns and fires caused by arcing.
For (2) the exact configuration basically does not matter, because generally speaking all battery packs capable of storing a large amount of energy are also able to release a large amount of energy in short time. So if you cause a short you'll always get a nice arc. Note that most kinds of protections are way too slow to suppress arcing, so you can always burn yourself. Arc-fault detection is more difficult in DC systems as well.
(1) is mostly a matter of doing things right. This means active temperature monitoring and measures (cooling, venting, shut-off) for larger packs. Independent over-voltage and over-current monitoring. And of course the little things, like wiring things up the right way and placing sense wires at the proper locations. For example, this is a simple thing of doing things wrong:
+ Charger -
| |
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
|- Cell -|
| |
+ Sense -
Designing these kinds of circuits correctly requires a lot more experience and detail knowledge than one may think at first. (Besides miniaturization this is another reason why one-chip battery management chips are so popular in the industry).
——————
I did a few things with a few types of batteries (lithium ion and lead) and these little cells can cause an impressive amount of uh "disturbance" in short order. I admit I am almost as careful (in a different way, obviously) with them as when handling high-voltage things like the HV oscillator in an old 'scope.
- dreamcompiler 9y ago> + Charger - | | |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| | | + Sense - What is being sensed here and why is it wrong? If voltage is being sensed and the busses are fat chunks of copper, this seems entirely proper. What am I missing? EDIT: Wait, I think I know. You also need independent current measurement at each cell to detect internal shorts. And probably a way to automatically isolate such cells.
- cucuuc 9y agoShort detection < bingo. Technically it depends on the cell chemistry and how they fail.
- andlier 9y agoIf each cell is connected to the bus bars with fuse wire (like in the Tesla battery pack for instance) this connection diagram seems valid. Same way it is connected in the car/powerwall packs that tesla makes at least.
- dom0 9y ago"Charger" would of course also be for discharge. "Sense" can either be charge sense, but that's not very common (due to CCCV charging), or monitoring. In either case, in this way of wiring things up the uppermost cell has a lower resistance connection to the charge/discharge port compared to the lowermost cell. So that uppermost cell will handle higher currents and overall will degrade more quickly. (This frequently applies when connecting "identical" parts in parallel in power electronics, e.g. capacitor banks). If the voltage feedback (assuming there is any) is taken from the lower side, then a reduced voltage (by U=Rbus×Ibus) will be measured, which is lower than the voltage present at the cell terminals. Siblings mentioned that you want protection against internal cell shorts, using fuse wires or similar. A better configuration would look like + Charger | |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| |- Cell -| | Charger - As you can see the total length of wire/bus between the pack's poles and each cell is the same length, so has the same resistance.