电池安全：我们需要新法规吗？

This look inside a Galaxy Note shows the tight XY clearances to the battery. (Courtesy of Instrumental)

At the time of this writing, we are still waiting for an official announcement from Samsung concerning what caused Galaxy Note 7 batteries to catch fire and explode. However, a manufacturing technology company calledInstrumentalis suggesting new reasons for this dangerous flaw—among them, that there was no space to allow for swelling of the battery. This insight has led me to think about whether safer regulation and standards for cellphone battery designs should (and could) be implemented.

由于怀疑该缺陷不仅仅是电池部分问题，因此Instrumental决定拆除Galaxy Note 7。该公司得出的结论是，智能手机的激进设计是电池爆炸的原因。“我们发现的令人惊讶的是：即使在正常运行期间，该设计也可以压缩电池，” Enstrumental的首席执行官兼创始人Anna Shedletsky在博客条目.

Shedletsky指出：“任何电池工程师都会告诉您，有必要在电池上方留出一定比例的天花板[10％是一个粗略的大脑规则]。”“随着时间的流逝，电池将扩展到该空间。我们两个月大的单元（请参阅照片）没有天花板：电池和粘合剂厚5.2毫米，在5.2毫米深的口袋中休息。应该有0.5毫米的天花板。这就是机械工程师称线对线的方式。而且由于它打破了这样的基本规则，因此一定是故意的。当我们打开时，我们的单位甚至可能承受压力。”

如果三星在努力innovate-pushed boundaries and consciously built a dangerous product, it begs the question: Should standards be changed to better reinforce the safety of consumers from product fails like this? It is confusing to understand which U.S. entities and international organizations take part in lithium-battery safety standards and regulations, and the roles those involved play. Equally unclear is how device manufacturers deal with battery certification. Some of the organizations thatareactively addressing these issues include the Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL), the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), Underwriters Laboratories (UL), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).

UL, for example, provides safety-related certification, validation, testing, inspection, auditing, advising, and training services to a wide range of clients, including manufacturers, retailers, policymakers, regulators, service companies, and consumers. The key standards are UL 1642, UL 1973, and UL 2580.

Given the crossover between them and the different missions of these organizations, it’s hard to tell which group should step in and at what point. Maybe the Jurisdiction of Consumer Product Safety Commission should change the way it protects consumers by putting in steps to eliminate such product fails. Or should we better reinforce lithium-battery safety standards? Should test and certification procedures for designs change, too?

为了创新和成为市场中的第一名，许多公司都在急于测试和验证程序。作为一名工程师，我欣赏并尊重设计工程师如何一直在寻求创新以增加电池运行时间，同时减小尺寸和重量。

But as a consumer of electronic products, I think safety should go first. No one wants a cellphone to explode while charging on a nightstand next to their bed or inside their purse or pocket. I believe that stronger standards should be implemented to avoid another major fail design and protect consumers. Yet, such steps must be taken without over-limiting innovation.

What do you think should be done? Feel free to与我分享您的意见.