电池安全：我们需要新的法规吗？

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.

由于怀疑缺陷超过电池部分问题，有助于拆除一个星系注释7。该公司得出结论，智能手机的侵略性设计负责电池爆炸。“我们发现的是令人惊讶的：设计即使在正常运行期间也可以压缩电池，”Anna Shedletsky，Instrument的首席执行官和创始人说博客条目.

“任何电池工程师都会告诉您，必须在电池上方留下一些百分比的天花板[10％是粗略的拇指规则]，”Shedletsky指出。“随着时间的推移，电池将扩展到该空间。我们两个月的单位（见图）没有天花板：电池和粘合剂厚5.2毫米，搁置在5.2毫米的深袋中。应该有0.5毫米的天花板。这是机械工程师呼叫线路。由于它破坏了这样的基本规则，因此它必须是故意的。当我们打开它时，我们的单位可能会受到压力。“

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?

In an effort to innovate and be number one in the market, many companies are rushing their test and validation procedures. As an engineer, I admire and respect how design engineers are always seeking to innovate in order to increase battery operating times while reducing size and weight.

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.