Skip to main content

Batteries Overheat And Catch Fire, Phones Have Batteries, Therefore...

Over the weekend we learned of two more smartphones catching fire as a result of overheating batteries. In the first incident an Australian surfer had his possessions and camper van torched after his iPhone 7 Plus caught fire while he was away surfing. In the second a Galaxy S7 Edge burnt out in Canada.

You'll notice that neither of these devices is the problematic Note 7.

The thing is Li-ion batteries catch fire. They are tightly packed into sealed devices with a source of some significant heat energy just a few centimetres away. Inevitably some are going to get heated to the point where the chemicals within the battery ignite, resulting in a burnt out phone and damage to items or people around it.

Batteries that have suffered an impact are more likely to flare up. The sort of impacts that occur in everyday phone usage.

Whilst we continue to demand that phones get slimmer and slimmer, perform better and run for longer OEMs will continue to increase the energy density of batteries. Which means a greater change of failure.

The Note 7's problem wasn't so much that it was catching fire - that's not unknown for smartphones - rather the rate at which it was happening, which was way above the accepted norm.

So we'll continue to hear reports of burning phones because phones will always burn. However when you consider that there are upwards of two billion handsets in use around the world today, two failures over a weekend don't amount to much of a problem.

So unless your intention is to pour scorn on those on the other side of the smartphone fence, you can probably ignore further stories about burning phones and the media attention can hopefully switch to the next big scandal.


Popular posts from this blog

F1: Robert Kubica Impresses In Renault Test Run

The car may be old but its the performance of the driver that's the story here. Robert Kubica returned to F1, after a fashion, earlier this week with an extensive test run in a 2012 Lotus Renault F1 car at Valencia.
The age of the car and the circuit were likely determined by F1's current rules which ban testing, but the reason for Kubica being in the car is far more interesting. Considered by many to be a potential World Champion and certainly one of the fastest drivers of his generation, Kubica's F1 career seemed to be over after a 2011 crash whilst driving in the Rally of Andora. His Skoda Fabia was penetrated by a guardrail in the high speed accident partially severing his right arm.
Up until last year Kubica has been competing in rallying, with the expectation that the limited movement in his repaired arm would prohibit a return to single seater racing.
So this week's test is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because Kubica completed 115 laps of the ret…

F1: Robert Kubica's Williams Test Asks More Questions Than It Answers

Comparing driver's times at a tyre evaluation test like last week's Abu Dhabi event is difficult at the best of times, but when trying to assess the performance of a driver who has been out of the sport for six years, that difficulty level is raised even higher.
On the face of it Robert Kubica's test for Williams was a success. Fastest of the three Williams drivers present the headlines look promising. However, taking into consideration the different tyres used to set those times muddies the water considerably.
Kubica ran a three lap qualifying simulation on the new 'hyper-soft' tyre - which should have given him a two-second advantage. Correcting for tyres it would appear that Kubica was significantly slower than Sergei Sorotkin - who was on the harder 'soft' tyre - and marginally quicker than Lance Stroll, the team's only contracted driver.

Stroll's family fortune currently funds Williams, so there' no chance that he will be anywhere but in a…

Panos Panay's Defence Of Microsoft Surface Hardware Sounds Eerily Familiar

This weekend I went out with my ten year old daughter to select a laptop for her school year beginning in January. The schools requirements are quite specific, requiring a Windows 10 device, with a preference for a touchscreen and a stylus. She chose a Surface Pro, after trying a large number of different options. Having seen the way I use my own Surface Pro - and tried it herself there was only ever going to be two options - and the other was a Surface Laptop.
I tell you this so that you understand I am a buyer of Microsoft's products through choice, not compulsion. I'm on my third Surface device now. 
So when Panos Panay dismissed reports of the death of the Surface hardware line, I was very interested to see exactly how strong these denials were. Especially how they reflect what has gone before. To whit: Windows 10 Mobile.
Panay claimed that Microsoft is in hardware for the long haul. Almost exactly mirroring the words of Terry Myerson, when he claimed Windows Mobile was g…