Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Nanobatteries — Safer By Design

Posted by kdawson on Tue Jan 16, 2007 08:44 PM
from the no-more-go-boom dept.
Power Hardware
Iddo Genuth writes "Conventional Li-Ion batteries have been known to catch fire and explode. A new, safer type of Li-Ion nanobattery that might help prevent such mishaps has been developed by researchers at Tel Aviv University. These nanobatteries should prove useful for various micro devices used for medical, military, and a range of other applications. They are 2-4 years from commercial availability."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Dell Notebooks Catch On Fire! 188 comments
Mr_Person writes "Dell Computer will recall about 284,000 notebook batteries due to a flaw in batteries incorporated in Inspiron 5000 and 5000(e) notebooks. The flaw causes the batteries to produce excessive amounts of heat, in fact, at least one notebook has even gotten to the point of catching on fire!" I thought the worst part of Dell Laptops was the fact that they broke all the time, and that they billed me for months after I shipped them the laptop back claiming they never got it. Maybe you could use Dell Laptops as an alternate heat source, what with rising gas prices *rimshot*
[+] Dell's Exploding Laptop Autopsy 141 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Dell has gone to the Consumer Product Safety Commission looking for help determining the cause of death for its exploding laptop. Dell has been blaming the lithium ion battery; the commission seems to have had a few problems with those batteries in the past."
[+] Alan Cox's Exploding Laptop 339 comments
Bowie J. Poag writes to mention a page put up to commemorate the explosion of Alan Cox's laptop. From the article: "Alan was on the other side of the room from the laptop. I was elsewhere. He yelled out, I ambled towards the room in my own good time, and then I heard 'Fire! Real fire! Call the fire brigade, now!' and I speeded up a bit. From Alan subsequently, I gather there was an explosion and flying pieces of laptop, and a fireball, and a couple of fires started where (presumably) boiling battery landed, and one fragment smashed an LCD monitor. And then there was smoke and smell (there is still smell) and smoke alarm wailing and firemen and sirens and paramedics (happily unneeded) and police and a man with a notebook asking questions for the fire report.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Nanobatteries — Safer By Design 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • So... (Score:4, Funny)

    by make dev (1004307) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:46PM (#17639882)
    We'll have 2-4 more years of exploding laptops?

  • Micro devices and Explosions (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Salvance (1014001) * on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:48PM (#17639918) Homepage Journal
    Is there really that much of an explosion/fire risk for very small and microbatteries? Sure, these nanobatteries would be fantastic for small robots, but I'd guess we're well over 4 years away from being able to make large batteries (e.g. laptop batteries) utilizing nanofabrication techniques that could also reduce fire/explosion risks.
    • Is there really that much risk from any battery? How many fatalities have there been from the notorious laptop batteries? How many injuries? Maybe we should turn our attention to more menacing and sinister threats, like piping hot coffee at McDonalds.
    • Is there really that much of an explosion/fire risk for very small and microbatteries?

      Sure is [smh.com.au]
      • ok, that's one guy.

        One guy out of ... what? 3 billion? 6? I can't remember.

        I'm gonna need a number greater than ... oh, let's say 1000 before I even start considering that li-ion batteries may actually pose some kind of legitimate safety concern.

    • Is there really that much of an explosion/fire risk for very small and microbatteries?


      Maybe not to the user, but even if you aren't harmed, having your shiny, new gadget destroyed by an exploding battery is a bummer.
      • What do you care, if a nanobattery explodes you won't even notice it.

        • What do you care, if a nanobattery explodes you won't even notice it.

          I care because the device it was powering is now broken and needs to be replaced. If you prefer gadgets, devices, etc, that randomly break and need replacement, more power to ya!

  • Why Wait? (Score:3, Informative)

    by WindBourne (631190) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:49PM (#17639940) Journal
    http://www.mrs.org/s_mrs/sec_subscribe.asp?CID=255 3&DID=117686&action=detail [mrs.org]">You can buy the better ones in Colorado.
    Of course, you will have to compete with Uncle Sam, specifically, NSA and CIA. [infinitepo...utions.com]
  • Another story about a breakthrough battery technology 2-4 years away. Wake me up when one of these breakthroughs becomes a reality the readers of Slashdot can afford and use.

  • Hardly a nanobattery (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Xeth (614132) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:50PM (#17639960) Journal
    FTFA:
    Using a silicon or glass substrate, the team from TAU created a matrix of tiny holes each 50 microns in diameter and 500 micron deep.
    Atoms are on the order of a nanometer in diameter. These batteries are hundreds of thousands of times larger. Hell, you could probably hook these up with current chip lithography techniques (they're doing tens of microns now). Interesting microbattery, but let's keep the nanotech hype out of it.

    • Re:Hardly a nanobattery (Score:5, Informative)

      by evanbd (210358) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:58PM (#17640080)

      You're off by a bit there :) Atoms have diameters measured in picometers; bond lengths tend to be tends to a hundred or so picometers. Current high end chips are made on 65nm processes these days, with 45 and 30 (iirc) not too far off -- but the point is silicon litho techniques do tens of nanometers, not microns. You can get micron level precision with machine tools, even -- very expensive ones, granted, but still :)

      I agree completely though, calling this nanotech is a little iffy when you can see the things with merely a strong magnifying glass and resolve details with a decent optical microscope.

      • Argh, damnit. Quick Google searches for the lose :( Oh well, what's three orders of magnitude here and there?

    • 'Nano' is routinely abused here (Score:5, Insightful)

      by caitsith01 (606117) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @09:10PM (#17640216) Homepage Journal
      I would have thought that a correct use of the prefix 'nano' would involve an object, device or effect, the WHOLE of which is on a nanometre scale. So for example, a 'nanobattery' would be a battery the WHOLE of which is on a nanometre scale.

      I'm obviously not alone is being heartily sick of anything involving components parts which are on an atomic scale (e.g.... uh, CHEMICALS) being referred to as 'nano'-whatever. For instance a while back we had this [slashdot.org] idiotic story about 'lead compounds' producing 'nanocrystals' and being used by the ancient Egyptians.

      Next on slashdot: scientists develop nanobreathing technology using a nanogas mixture containing nanoparticles only an few atoms wide! Revolutionary nanopower technique delivers charged nanoparticles to electrical devices through ordinary wire! Nanolightbulbs emitting nanophotons found to have been in use since the 18th century! Nanocar constructed entirely from nanoparticles of metal, plastic and glass runs entirely on nano-fuel only a few carbon atoms long!
      • There should be at least one dimension in nanometer scale for the ting to be called "nano" something. Things in hundreds of of nanometer can be called "mesoscale". And things in microns are called microscale. TFA is shameless.

      • yeah! (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Yeah! Same goes for words that start with 'micro'. Words like microscope are so lame.
      • I would have thought that a correct use of the prefix 'nano' would involve an object, device or effect, the WHOLE of which is on a nanometre scale. So for example, a 'nanobattery' would be a battery the WHOLE of which is on a nanometre scale.
        That's probably why the new iPod nano has a clip on it... so you don't lose it.
        • BAH! That's the SHUFFLE, not the Nano!
          I could have sworn that I hit the Preview button instead of the Submit button. It's not my fault, they were only four nanopixels apart!
        • Did Apple slip one by me, or are you talking about the Shuffle?
    • I agree, microns are hardly nano scale. My master's thesis topic involves trying to develop a nanoporous membrane to be used in lithium ion batteries. If I ever make pores, they will be 10-20 nm in diameter (trust me, I've seen pictures). Which reminds me, I need to go check on something in the lab.

  • Yeah? Cos altairnano have lion-titanate batteries (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Colin Smith (2679) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:51PM (#17639994)
    And it's on the market now. 10,000-15,000 cycles with little or no degradation, double the energy density of current li-ions. Ideal for automotive stuff, they're already shipping to customers.

    http://www.altairnano.com/ [altairnano.com]
     

  • Safer? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rowama (907743)
    So they won't explode or catch fire. How long will it be before some dreaded danger arises that we haven't imagined? It is nanotechnology, after all.

    mood/pessimistic (yeah, I read the myspace post.)
      • There have always been nanoscale particles in the atmosphere, even more so since the Industrial Revolution started. We've been living with nanoparticles ever since we learnt to make fire. Some materials get *safer* as they get smaller - one reason asbestos fibres are dangerous is not because they are so narrow but because they are (relatively) so long - nano width, but micro length. The body can't get rid of them, so forms scarring in the lungs instead. Something that is nano in all directions is more easi
  • That's all terrific and such, but I'm still more interested in nano- hard drive technology. Like that Wired thing about them using extremophile viruses from Yellowstone geisers by harvesting their superprotein shells and using that for data storage - 50 gigs? meh, 500 terrabytes. I have to give the creators of these batteries credit for the attempt though. My laptop still has yet to explode, thankfully.

  • wow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Lord Ender (156273) on Tuesday January 16 2007, @08:58PM (#17640072) Homepage
    Nano batteries for micro devices? I'm pico excited about this!

  • "...that might help prevent such mishaps..."

    I might possibly be pushed more towards apparent annoyance by this non-commital language. Let's start with the unqualified version, then add the qualifiers one by one:

    ...that prevents such mishaps... (good, a solution!)

    ...that helps prevent such mishaps... (so they will still happen, they'll just be reduced)

    ...that might help prevent such mishaps... (so it might not even do anything?)

  • Yeah... Li-Ion batteries explode... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Conventional SONY Li-ion batteries that is...

  • ...as there's a Boston firm that made the packs that are in one of the brands of power tools (Milkwalkee I think?); they can take a recharge rate much, much higher than most battery packs, and the chargers are using a fraction of the maximum rate. The packs don't have to cool down after being drained before getting charged, etc. Google says the technology is lithium-manganese based.

    There's also a Japanese firm that is making safer lithium ion packs (so they're cheaper from a materials standpoint.) They

    • The Milwaukee tools use a Molicel
      http://www.molienergy.com/ [molienergy.com]
      It's a Lithium manganese oxide Li-Ion Cell.

      Pros are higher discharge rates and faster re-charge then a Li-poly cell

      Cons are the watts/Kg is lower. (li-poly of the same capacity is lighter)

      Some people are using them as a cheep alternative to Li-Poly cells in Electric R/C Aircraft.
      The Weight is the big trade off though.

  • Come on, you all know that in tech, 2-4 years has a 50% chance of equalling never.

  • Fundamental flaw in logic. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Short Circuit (52384) * <mikemol@gmail.com> on Tuesday January 16 2007, @10:05PM (#17640838) Homepage Journal
    From TFA:

    Since each nanobattery is comprised of thousands of small batteries, even if one of these small batteries has a short circuit and fails, the entire battery can keep functioning, lossing only a very small amount of power. Similar damage to a conventional Li-Ion battery could result in substantial loss of power or a complete malfunction and in extreme cases even fire or explosion.
    So they're putting microcells in a series/parallel network, and claiming that, since each microcell contains minute quantities of energy, a short circuit would result in only minute consequences.

    But, again, they've put the batteries in a series/parallel network. They don't mention that a short could take place in places in the network other than exactly across one cell. Let's say an impurity spec lands across a couple wires. Depending on which couple wires, you might have shorted just a few microcells, or you could be shorting out the whole battery.

    The reason Li-Ion batteries are dangerous is the sheer energy density. Rearranging that energy with a different battery structure isn't going to negate the fact that, simplistically, you somewhere have two conductors across which is the entire potential of the battery. (Unless you divide the battery into segments and give each segment a unique load. However, that would require a fundamental re-thinking of how electronic devices are powered.)
    • "Unless you divide the battery into segments and give each segment a unique load. However, that would require a fundamental re-thinking of how electronic devices are powered."

      Right. They could never combine any logic circuits or protections with this.

      "The reason Li-Ion batteries are dangerous is the sheer energy density."

      I think the reason is because they haven't figured out how to segment it yet. Using small quanta is a step towards figuring out how to regulate it. If you can segment it, it seems t
      • Many lithium batteries are already segmented into regular cells - the problem is that one cell dieing can generate the heat to put others over the edge.

    • The reason Li-Ion batteries are dangerous is the sheer energy density.
      Most're graphite cathode.

       

      • I think one of the things that has made the whole battery problem more acute is the recent increase number of devices that use a rechargeable but not-replaceable battery. One of the biggest complaints about the iPod is the relatively short battery life. This issue could be nullified by an easily-user-replacable battery: the battery wears out, quickly replace it with a new one, the music continues.

        One of the reasons that many high-energy density lithium-ion batteries are not easily-user-replacable is because

  • Since power is proportional to volume (length^3), scaling laws for a nano-scale battery are VERY unfavorable. I'm not sure how they will get over this hurdle.

    Just like nano-sized heat engines, nano sized batteries have a big problem in this department. There may be advantages in internal resistance or peak current, but the power density of such a battery, not to mention the cost, seem unfavorable.
  • I <3 Vim

  • omg (Score:3, Funny)

    by Fist! Of! Death! (1038822) on Wednesday January 17 2007, @06:04AM (#17643944)
    I think I got Voltaic Piles while reading this article

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.