Fire Suppression Stickers

[Asphalt]

With all the battery fires lately, many of us are looking for ways to reduce the risk and damage caused by a potential battery fire. Fire-proof storage boxes and fire extinguishing balls are good layers of defence. Here's another, more convenient option.

Fire Suppression Stickers

https://firesticker.ca/

https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B08DLDSTYR/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_F3iaGbHAAC0PT?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

These small stickers can be placed inside your wheel, next to the battery packs. At a temperature above 100 C, they start to emit NOVEC 1230, a waterless fire suppression gas that is electrically non-conductive and leaves no residue. It works by rapidly dropping the temperature of the fire, extinguishing it and preventing thermal runaway to neighbouring cells.

https://www.3mcanada.ca/3M/en_CA/novec-ca/fire-suppression/

Some examples of it in action:

 

[WheelyBad]

I’m totally buying this. Good lookin’ out! 

[Asphalt]

Discount code M2EV20 for 20% off.

[RagingGrandpa]

Neat!

On 1/14/2021 at 1:34 PM, Asphalt said:

preventing thermal runaway to neighbouring cells

Has that been demonstrated?

But, even if it can't stop the other cells from going up, putting such a device inside a metal box sounds helpful in minimizing the rubber and plastic fire that usually follows cell destruction.

[Asphalt]

1 hour ago, RagingGrandpa said:

Has that been demonstrated?

Good question. I haven't seen a demonstration yet. Someone needs to sacrifice a battery pack for science.

In principal, dropping the temperature of the fire should reduce the mechanism for thermal runaway, but I would like to see video evidence too.

At the very least, it should help reduce the rate at which the fire grows - hopefully buying some crucial time to get the wheel to a safer location.

These fire suppression stickers have only been around for a few years. With the growing use of large LiOn battery packs in consumer goods, I wonder if manufacturers will start to integrate NOVEC 1230 directly into battery packs?

Here's a website with some more info http://militekfss.com/

[Asphalt]

I installed the automatic fire suppression stickers inside the Sherman.

A single 100mm x 50mm sticker is supposed to suppress a fire for a 20L volume, so I figured cutting it in half would be fine.

I attached them above each battery pack and repeated the process with a second sticker on the other side of the Sherman.

In addition to this, I bought a fibreglass fire blanket.

With these two precautions, I feel a little better about being able to get the wheel out of the building in the event of a battery fire.

Edited January 24, 2021 by Asphalt
Reformat photos.

[Hsiang]

This looks really sketchy to me; I have specified a good bit of fire suppression production/ system for work and have never seen this or anything similar used. There are also many government standard and regulation associated with this type of product for good reason since it is life safety related. 

Also usually the first thing I look for are UL tests which shows how the product was tested since that tells me what how it'll actually work. A good examples are the UL test from cellblock EX; another fire suppression product specifically designed to put out battery fire.

https://cellblockfcs.com/documents/

Not saying that it doesn't work, but the lack of any sort of documentation is suspicious.

[314ka4y]

Hi Hsiang,

The problem is that Cellblock EX doesn't have any UL certificates. 

And this test shows that nearby cells had temperature up to 600F 

8 hours ago, Hsiang said:

This looks really sketchy to me; I have specified a good bit of fire suppression production/ system for work and have never seen this or anything similar used. There are also many government standard and regulation associated with this type of product for good reason since it is life safety related. 

Also usually the first thing I look for are UL tests which shows how the product was tested since that tells me what how it'll actually work. A good examples are the UL test from cellblock EX; another fire suppression product specifically designed to put out battery fire.

https://cellblockfcs.com/documents/

Not saying that it doesn't work, but the lack of any sort of documentation is suspicious.

 

[Hsiang]

14 hours ago, 314ka4y said:

Hi Hsiang,

The problem is that Cellblock EX doesn't have any UL certificates. 

And this test shows that nearby cells had temperature up to 600F 

Sure, that will be ideal, but at least they have some documentation vs this sticker thing which seems to just have some home brew test that they rig up them selves. 

[null]

The fire from the battery cells won't be stopped by oxygen starvation AFAIK, however it could help for the burning plastic shell.

If I went that way I would have padded the outer panels in each little rectangle of the structural grid (so as to have a whole lot), as you have to consider the EUC as burning in open air. (The jet like flame from the battery will quickly melt through the housing)

Edited January 26, 2021 by null

[314ka4y]

Hi Guys,

I introduce myself. I am Sergey, from "this stickers" company.

This conversation is fascinating for me, especially ideas that I can find from this conversation. So I would be very grateful for all your doubts and cons that you see in our approach and product.

Why I think it could work:
Our product initially was developed and used as a fire suppressant product for telecom LFP 48V 50-100Ah batteries. It was tested (customer testings) and installed in many thousands of base stations.

What is the approach:
We know that it is impossible to stop lithium fire. This is a fact that can be seen even from tests of cellblock EX. It will disappear by itself quite fast.
The idea is to minimize the fire and don't allow thermal runaway of nearby cells—otherwise huge risk of harsh fire. 
Fire suppressant agent in stickers reduce the temperature, not taking away the oxygen. 
Stickers are ideal because they are placed near the fire source, so they operate just near the pain point. The physics of lithium battery fire is that - before the fire, there is hot gas emission with 400-600C gas. Inside small volume, this gas will activate the sticker before the fire actually started. So we have - closed volume with a fire suppressant that reduces the temperature before the visible fire. 

Will it work or no:
All chemistries and applications are different. We have good results with prismatic LFP, NMC(LMO) cells used in telecom and ESS.
Other chemistries are different, but fire physics should be the same. 

Next steps:
As I can see, there are many fans of EUC, and we are also interested in understanding how it will work in EUC.
Let's think and even try. 

[null]

Hi and welcome.
I'll have to do quick here, but:

- PEVs use and ownership will certainly increase, and the presence of potentially dangerous batteries could make for a market for dedicated fire safety solutions. We had a few threads around here about battery fire and potential methods as it is of concern.

- EUCs are so spot on, both for efficiency and pleasure, I highly recommend you have a closer look.

cheers-

[AtlasP]

What I'd love to see:

• Someone, whether an EUC manufacturer or reseller like ewheels or maybe a youtuber (who thinks it will get enough clicks to make it worth it), tests these stickers with a fire in an actual EUC. (This could also be done by the sticker manufacturer, but I understand that some people would prefer an independent tester instead. Although it would still be far better than nothing, and would be major kudos to the sticker manufacturer. They appear to be in Vacouver? Anyone in Vancouver have an old beater wheel to sell them used?)
• Then if it works, either manufacturers or a reseller like ewheels partners with this company to have them installed in all their wheels. This would be a strong selling point and differentiator for any manufacturer or reseller that does this.

(On the youtuber angle, such a test would get way more views if it [also] contained an ebike and/or e-scooter and/or e-skateboard, but for selfish reasons obviously we'd definitely want specifically an EUC tested as well--as they are certainly unique in the size of their batteries compared to other PEVs.)

My advice to the sticker manufacturer: PEVs (particularly including ebikes/escooters) could be your company's watershed moment. Doing these kinds of tests, being successful, and subsequently partnering with manufacturers and/or resellers of PEVs would be a massive new market.

Edited January 27, 2021 by AtlasP

[Chriull]

1 hour ago, 314ka4y said:

Hi Guys,

Welcome, great you step by here!

1 hour ago, 314ka4y said:

Why I think it could work:

Your companies product seems really promising! I thought too it could work - from your company i'd like to here more specific guarantees that it works! 

I assume this is a new market segment for your company and it would be great to get some profound statements and guidelines!

1 hour ago, 314ka4y said:

As I can see, there are many fans of EUC, and we are also interested in understanding how it will work in EUC.

For example @Jason McNeil, owner/founder of ewheels.com, @WilliamG (?more often around here from his company?) as ?biggest? US reseller of EUCs could be interested in evaluating your product and publishing "real world" tests of "blowing up" EUCs li ion packs... (And they are situated in california - a nice trip around this time of year from icy vancouver;) )

And @EcoDrift, ?biggest? reseller in moscow and operator/founder of the russian ecodrift.ru forum.

I'd trust both of them if they state your product stops/"minimalizes the effects of" an EUC battery pack gooing loose. Although they are resellers with commercial interest - but i'm convinced they won't risk their reputation for an "accessory".

Interesting should be especially the amount of stickers per cells and placement. And/or placement around other high/over-temperature parts like motor wires/capacitors/mosfets not too far from the li ion cells.

2 hours ago, 314ka4y said:

The idea is to minimize the fire and don't allow thermal runaway of nearby cells—otherwise huge risk of harsh fire. 
Fire suppressant agent in stickers reduce the temperature, not taking away the oxygen. 

+1.

Although i'm just interested in this area and have no real experience this sounds very realistic too me.

I'm looking forward to the tests and follow up recommendations!

Maybe best even not to hear too much but the serious resellers just using these stickers in their sold EUCs!

32 minutes ago, AtlasP said:

maybe a youtuber

Pff... I really don't like to watch youtube reviews - i'm 100% at the mercy of the youtuber's in regard of his speed/slowness or if he decides to digress... Or to jzst realize after the video that there was no real content

Every posted report with pictures is at my controll - i can scroll and read/look at pictures at my pace and i can skip whatever i decide to.

... but maybe i'm just too old for this "new kind of stuff" ...

And if @Marty Backe makes a review/test on his channel chances could be great i'll forget my youtube concerns

[Hsiang]

2 hours ago, 314ka4y said:

Why I think it could work:
Our product initially was developed and used as a fire suppressant product for telecom LFP 48V 50-100Ah batteries. It was tested (customer testings) and installed in many thousands of base stations.

If your product was specified for used as part of telecom closet installation; I imagine there must had been tests conducted by an OSHA approved laboratory. or even better UL certificates showing that it is in conformance to fire suppression standard.

Again based on experience any product associated with life safety usually have these documentation available on their website since its the first thing any specifier would look for. If you do please share it here so we can all see exactly what are the parameter the tests had been conducted.

40 minutes ago, Chriull said:

Although i'm just interested in this area and have no real experience this sounds very realistic too me.

I'm looking forward to the tests and follow up recommendations!

I can't emphasize enough the importance of having these tests conducted by approved labs as they act a neutral party with enough experience so as to create the proper controlled testing environment. Any private none certified tests are suspect and I would be very leery of any product especially when it comes to life safety. 

[AtlasP]

23 hours ago, Hsiang said:

I can't emphasize enough the importance of having these tests conducted by approved labs as they act a neutral party with enough experience so as to create the proper controlled testing environment. Any private none certified tests are suspect and I would be very leery of any product especially when it comes to life safety. 

With that requirement you're demanding a higher standard for the fire prevention mechanism than you are for the EUC company's production of the actual EUCs causing the fires in the first place! (rofl) ;-)

Edited January 27, 2021 by AtlasP

[Chriull]

5 minutes ago, AtlasP said:

With that requirement you're expecting a higher standard for the fire prevention mechanism than you are for the EUC company's production of the actual EUCs causing the fires in the first place! (rofl) ;-)

The expectations to EUC companies production standards are quite, ähhh, cough ... yes, exactly... Ähh - what did we talk about? 

But i'd expect the standard for an additional safety accessory to exceed the standard of the failing product - or it just won't help or even increase the unsafety.

[Asphalt]

@Hsiang I'm a fan of your thoughtful observations on PEVs. Your standards for usability and safety must be quite high as a successful architect.

Please don't take this as petty - I'm genuinely curious what set-up you are using to mitigate the fire risks of the PEVs in your place?

Perhaps the topic of an upcoming video?

[Hsiang]

1 hour ago, AtlasP said:

With that requirement you're expecting a higher standard for the fire prevention mechanism than you are for the EUC company's production of the actual EUCs causing the fires in the first place! (rofl) ;-)

Well may be it comes from what I am used to in my own line of work; but when it comes to life safety related product any false claim is super dangerous since there're a high likely hood for people to get hurt when something fail. Sure It'll be great if EUCs are build to a higher standard but its primary purpose isn't really for safety so maybe that's why I think of it as being in a different category?

30 minutes ago, Asphalt said:

I'm a fan of your thoughtful observations on PEVs. Your standards for usability and safety must be quite high as a successful architect.

Please don't take this as petty - I'm genuinely curious what set-up you are using to mitigate the fire risks of the PEVs in your place?

Perhaps the topic of an upcoming video?

Thank you! well I am not quite sure about the "successful" part and I wouldn't say I am happy with my current setup either. I did buy two bags of that Cellblock EX stuff and am still trying to figure out how to come up with a setup that works.

I did think about talking about it in my video but figure it would be so incredibly boring that I best just limited to talking about it here. =D

[Tawpie]

I don’t know how much faith to put in UL/ETL...

DISCLOSURE: I had to get UL or ETL marks for a large piece of equipment we manufactured. UL was very expensive, ETL less so. Their annual “inspection” was to come in, look around (never opened our equipment, just looked around the assembly area), and hand us a roll of stickers. My faith was shaken by reality.

Absolutely, it would be more comforting if the stickers carried a good housekeeping seal of approval, but that seal only says that a) UL has been paid yearly to use their Mark and b) that under the very specific test conditions the result was (whatever is needed to allow use of the Mark).

Not having a result from an independent lab doesn’t mean it won’t work, or won’t help. It just means that nobody paid somebody else to confirm a claim. A box of baking soda works on small grease fires and does so without independent verification.

Sure, the stickers might not do a dang thing. But what if they do? Right now we got nothing.

[Asphalt]

9 minutes ago, Hsiang said:

I did buy two bags of that Cellblock EX stuff and am still trying to figure out how to come up with a setup that works.

That CellblockEX looks like a good active response to a battery fire if you're at home and can deploy the particulate over your EUC.

What I like about the stickers is that they are a passive system and will deploy even if you're not at home - even if there's a fire while you're riding!

I wouldn't trust any single fire suppression product. We should all probably be using multiple fire response options.

20 minutes ago, Hsiang said:

I did think about talking about it in my video but figure it would be so incredibly boring that I best just limited to talking about it here. =D

A video talking about a fire response system would be interesting to a lot of PEV and drone enthusiasts:

• Fire alarm
• Fire extinguisher
• Fire blanket
• Fire balls
• Fire box
• Fire particulate
• Fire stickers
• Escape route

[Tawpie]

speaking of videos... @314ka4y Y'all should budget a few thousand and buy a BEATER Sherman (not a new one for heaven's sake, too many people would cry), sticker 1 side, put it on a stand and use a nail gun to drive several 3" framing nails into the battery packs on the stickered side. See what happens! If it works, nail the other side to show what happens without the stickers. If it doesn't work, still share so we don't go thinking these are good for something they're not.

Do this in a safe place... ask the Myth Busters for advice.

Edited January 27, 2021 by Tawpie

[Asphalt]

1 minute ago, Tawpie said:

speaking of videos... @314ka4y Y'all should budget a few thousand and buy a BEATER Sherman (not a new one for heaven's sake, too many people would cry), sticker 1 side, and use a nail gun to drive several 3" framing nails into the battery packs on the stickered side. See what happens! If it works, nail the other side to show what happens without the stickers. If it doesn't, still share so we don't go thinking these are good for something they're not.

Do this in a safe place... ask the Myth Busters for advice.

Begode should just install the stickers on every new wheel. I'm sure there'll be a fire video testing their effectiveness soon enough 

[314ka4y]

Hi, thank you for all your kind words:) 

In several posts, I will try to answer all of your ideas and proposals:) 

First of all, finish with the UL topic. The basic of UL certification is that they evaluate risks and give test recommendations for the end product. 

Like this: 

• ANSI/UL 8 CAN/ULC-S554 Water-Based Agent Fire Extinguishers
• ANSI/UL 154 CAN/ULC-S503 Carbon Dioxide Fire Extinguishers
• ANSI/UL 299 CAN/ULC-S504 Dry Chemical Fire Extinguishers
• ANSI/UL 626 CAN/ULC-S507 Water Fire Extinguishers
• ANSI/UL 2129, CAN/ULC-S566 Halocarbon Clean Agent Extinguishers

But they consider a fire extinguisher as something with a tank, nozzle, and all other elements. Stickers or CellblockEX can't satisfy it, just because there is no such product. Later this post you will see, that new standards come up with time.

Like PEV, requirements for "fire extinguishers and cell safety" should be in UL corresponding to PEV. I don't know is there any UL exists for PEV. Even to see the text of any UL test you need to pay 500-700$ (I haven't seen such thing with any European or Asian standard, but I might be wrong)

After digging into the topic, I found an interesting document (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yIkJfKSS0DDCr94o54qbUfrvgTUxyU-1/view?usp=sharing ), it is very close to your case, and it shows how safety standards and new UL certificates emerge. And the most interesting for me, that the reason was the same -fires. On pages 35-37, you can see that they assess batteries to avoid the fire in this UL standard.

So the End product should be made with accordance with UL2272, not the batteries or fire extinguisher system.

Another question - Do you trust or not UL... but it is very personal. 

On 1/26/2021 at 5:10 PM, Tawpie said:

 

DISCLOSURE: I had to get UL or ETL marks for a large piece of equipment we manufactured. UL was very expensive, ETL less so. Their annual “inspection” was to come in, look around (never opened our equipment, just looked around the assembly area), and hand us a roll of stickers. My faith was shaken by reality.

Absolutely, it would be more comforting if the stickers carried a good housekeeping seal of approval, but that seal only says that a) UL has been paid yearly to use their Mark and b) that under the very specific test conditions the result was (whatever is needed to allow use of the Mark).

 

I have heard many same stories. And I know a lot of cool equipment that have all required European certificates, but without UL, it can't be sold in the US.

 

Overall: I think it is a question for PEV Gurus, guys, have you ever heard about any UL certification for PEV or drones (drones probably UL 3030)?

Edited January 28, 2021 by 314ka4y
correction

[RagingGrandpa]

On 1/26/2021 at 3:00 PM, 314ka4y said:

I am Sergey, from "this stickers" company.

Thanks for coming!

We would like more development in the area of EUC safety, from anyone willing!
 

A few notes on the challenge you'll face:

On 1/26/2021 at 3:00 PM, 314ka4y said:

We have good results with NMC(LMO) cells used in telecom and ESS.

I assume that means a ~100wh NMC cylinder-cell pack, in a closed metal cabinet, containing more open space than batteries or equipment. Such as below:

It seems very different from EUC, which is a 900wh NMC cylinder-cell pack, in a closed plastic box, containing more batteries than open space. A far greater amount of energy-per-volume...

(the battery pack's internal structure is below)

Only the perimeter of the pack is exposed to the cavity of the enclosure, and even that perimeter is covered by plastic walls... These packs were designed for relatively 'no cooling' - there is no significant conduction or convection path for heat. (And "no cooling" is fine for operation, because our maximum discharge rate is around 1C.)

It seems like a very challenging environment for gaseous agents to be able to cool the pack, simply because of the tight packaging.

But every engineer deserves a good challenge

 

p.s. - tuck thin stickers in the gaps between the cells, within the pack itself?

Edited January 28, 2021 by RagingGrandpa