18650 sanyo cells get's very hot


HUGE range of batteries & accessories at www.batteryhookup.com 5% coupon "POWERWALLS"

shay477

New member
Joined
Apr 26, 2019
Messages
1
hello dear friends.

i have a lot of 18650 sanyo red cells. they are all from old laptop batteries.
when i put them in a smart charger, while discharging they get extremely hot so i cannot even touch them.

is that dangereous? i should get rid of them?
 

Korishan

Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2017
Messages
6,826
If you want more details, you could search the forum for "Sanyo Heaters", and you'll get a lot of threads one the topic. Some even go into deep detail as to "why" they get hot, and possible options to do with them
 

BlueSwordM

Member
Joined
Jul 5, 2017
Messages
423
Let me guess.

Did you get the Sanyo 18650s from battery packs between 2012-2016?

If so, then I would either be careful when testing for some characteristics, or just throw them out.
 

Overmind

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
455
I never encountered them to overheat while discharging.

The ones overheating at charging I eventually recovered by giving them 3 day breaks and then continuing charge.

What current do you use for discharging ?
It could be too much for them.
 

Wolf

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
1,693
It is so funny to see this topic (18650 sanyo cells get's very hot) come up time after time.
Also the same answers time after time. Well some Sanyos are just "Heaters". Maybe we need a FAQ for that subject alone.

The reason Sanyos have become known as heaters is that everyone just seems to throw these cells with a reasonable Voltage usually >2.8V into a charger at 1A and wonders why some get hot and some don't. Gee I had 2 cells both at 3V and one got blistering hot while the other one stayed nice and cool what's up with that???? is always asked. There really is a simple solution to this puzzle and yes you guessed it it is IR!!!!
( I probably should change my user title from Senior Member to a custom one "IR King") :D

So I will give everyone a challenge that is interested:
If you purchase a 4 wire kelvin 1kH AC m? meter such as this. YR1030

image_qkjyqs.jpg

and use it properly to measure the IR of Sanyo cells with an initial Voltage of at least 2.5V and according to this IR guideline.

image_owtfaz.jpg

Then if you get more than 5 heaters (>35°C with a 25°C ambient temperature charging at 1A) in100 (one hundred) cells (or more than 1 in 20) I will pay for the IR tester up to $60.00 US
That is how confident I am that this "Heater" issue can be put to rest once and for all with a simple ≈50 dollar tool and a precharging IR check. Besides once you have the IR tester you will wonder how you ever survived without it.
Please be sure to record all your findings in a proper format to receive the prize money.
Any questions just ask.
These cells in the picture were all within my IR limiting criteria and not a 1 was a heater. This is just a sample. My data for the IR criteria comes from 1348 Sanyo cells tested and recorded.

image_votytp.jpg


I am putting my money were my mouth is so anyone up for the challenge?

Wolf
 
Last edited:

drbacke

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
60
Wolf said:
It is so funny to see this topic (18650 sanyo cells get's very hot) come up time after time.
Also the same answers time after time. Well some Sanyos are just "Heaters". Maybe we need a FAQ for that subject alone.

The reason Sanyoshave become known as heaters is that everyone just seems to throw these cells with a reasonable Voltage usually >2.8Vinto a charger at 1A and wonders why some get hot and some don't. Gee I had 2 cells both at 3V and one got blistering hot while the other one stayed nice and cool what's up with that???? is always asked. There really is a simple solution to this puzzle and yes you guessed it it is IR!!!!
( I probably should change my user title from Senior Memberto a custom one "IR King") :D

So I will give everyone a challenge that is interested:
If you purchase a 4 wire kelvin 1kH AC m? meter such as this. YR1030

image_qkjyqs.jpg

and use it properly to measure the IR of Sanyo cells with an initial Voltage of at least 2.5V andaccording to this IR guideline.

image_owtfaz.jpg

Then if you get more than 5 heaters (>35C with a 25C ambient temperature charging at 1A)in100(one hundred)cells (or more than 1 in 20) I will pay for the IR tester up to $60.00 US
That is how confident I am that this "Heater" issue can be put to rest once and for all with a simple ~50 dollar tool and a precharging IR check. Besides once you have the IR tester you will wonder how you ever survived without it.
Please be sure to record all your findings in a proper format to receive the prize money.
Any questions just ask.
Thesecells in the picture wereall withinmyIR limiting criteria and not a 1 was a heater. This is just a sample. My data for the IR criteria comes from 1348 Sanyo cells tested and recorded.

image_votytp.jpg


I am putting my money were my mouth is so anyone up for the challenge?

Wolf

I use the same IR tester, but IR was never a good predictor for heaters in my database.
I have a lot of Sanyo cells with very low IR (even low in the same bunch) and there was no correlation between heaters and ir.
Only for self discharging the IR seems to be a low quality predictor. In combination with the relative capacity the self discharging rate is predictable. But also with very big deviation and only the self discharging rate in 14-30d.
If i would havemore data i would be able to programm a statistcal predictor for self discharging by given relative capacity and pre IR.
 

Cherry67

Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
506
Wolf said:
( I probably should change my user title from Senior Memberto a custom one "IR King") :D

And what am i ?? :D
 

Wolf

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
1,693
Cherry67 said:
Wolf said:
( I probably should change my user title from Senior Memberto a custom one "IR King") :D

And what am i ?? :D

Oh you are the IR god :D

Wolf


drbacke said:
I use the same IR tester, but IR was never a good predictor for heaters in my database.
I have a lot of Sanyo cells with very low IR (even low in the same bunch) and there was no correlation between heaters and ir.
Only for self discharging the IR seems to be a low quality predictor. In combination with the relative capacity the self discharging rate is predictable. But also with very big deviation and only the self discharging rate in 14-30d.
If i would havemore data i would be able to programm a statistcal predictor for self discharging by given relative capacity and pre IR.

@drbacke

It may not necessarily be the best predictor of heaters but it is a pretty good start. As you can see by my stipulations to the challenge I did leave myself a 5 cell per 100 leeway. Which is a 95% success rate any way you look at it. Plus the added bonus of my IR cutoff chart is that these cells will produce at least 80% capacity. Now there is such a thing on the Sanyos as a too low of an IR andmaybe I should have mentioned that. The chemistry in question really is usually ICR low drain and anything <30m? on that type of battery is to be questioned. I have had some UR18650FM cells with an IR of 23m? to 26m?. Those normally run in the >45m? range,that were almost instant heaters.

As far as the SD's are concerned IR isabsolutely agreatindicator the cell will degrade in the 14 to 30 days to an unacceptableV level.
But in the final analysis IR is really important in the determination if a cell is healthy or not. Unfortunately with the many different chemistries out there (slight difference as they may be)between different manufactures and different part numbers the IR measurement fluctuate widely
between cells. But one thing I can tell you for sure any 18650 cell with a reading of100m? or more is not worth messing with.

You are always welcome to check my data out as it is on my google drive.

Wolf
 

drbacke

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
60
Wolf said:
Cherry67 said:
Wolf said:
( I probably should change my user title from Senior Memberto a custom one "IR King") :D

And what am i ?? :D

Oh you are the IR god :D

Wolf


drbacke said:
I use the same IR tester, but IR was never a good predictor for heaters in my database.
I have a lot of Sanyo cells with very low IR (even low in the same bunch) and there was no correlation between heaters and ir.
Only for self discharging the IR seems to be a low quality predictor. In combination with the relative capacity the self discharging rate is predictable. But also with very big deviation and only the self discharging rate in 14-30d.
If i would havemore data i would be able to programm a statistcal predictor for self discharging by given relative capacity and pre IR.

@drbacke

It may not necessarily be the best predictor of heaters but it is a pretty good start. As you can see by my stipulations to the challenge I did leave myself a 5 cell per 100 leeway. Which is a 95% success rate any way you look at it. Plus the added bonus of my IR cutoff chart is that these cells will produce at least 80% capacity. Now there is such a thing on the Sanyos as a too low of an IR andmaybe I should have mentioned that. The chemistry in question really is usually ICR low drain and anything <30m? on that type of battery is to be questioned. I have had some UR18650FM cells with an IR of 23m? to 26m?. Those normally run in the >45m? range,that were almost instant heaters.

As far as the SD's are concerned IR isabsolutely agreatindicator the cell will degrade in the 14 to 30 days to an unacceptableV level.
But in the final analysis IR is really important in the determination if a cell is healthy or not. Unfortunately with the many different chemistries out there (slight difference as they may be)between different manufactures and different part numbers the IR measurement fluctuate widely
between cells. But one thing I can tell you for sure any 18650 cell with a reading of100m? or more is not worth messing with.

You are always welcome to check my data out as it is on my google drive.

Wolf



I know your results and the are very interesting. But results must be reproducable by an identical setup, which i have. Otherwise the results must be checked by a third Party to be sure. But i didnt see your max ir rates for the sanyos. So maybe this will change my results. I will tell you tomorrow and I hope you are right, this would help a lot ;)
But the correlation between the SD and the IR is not very high i think, even not in your DB. Also i cant see the startvoltage after first charge (not every charger reaches 4.2V)in your DB, so the voltage drop is not known. But maybe i just have the wrong DB, if so please tell me. But i will calculate the correlation factor with 4.2V assumption. So tomorrowI will do some math and present you the results.
Maybe i will have time to build some high order model for multivariate statistics. This could help to get reliable prediction results.
 

Cherry67

Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
506
Doc, i can second Wolfs opinion, on a much smaller database on my side, for the correlation of SD to IR is, that there is next to none.

There is as well hardly a valid physical explanation why it could/should be correlated.
 

drbacke

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
60
Cherry67 said:
Doc, i can seccond Wolfs opinion, on a much smaller database on my side, for the correlation of SD to IR is, that there is next to none.

There is as well hardly a valid physical explanation why it could/should be correlated.

This picture is made with wolfs database, it's IR over Self Discharge Rate in30d. There is no correlation at all and even with all these different cell types there should be one:

image_cyrtmz.jpg


The following picture is Relative Capacity (or capacity left in %) over self discharge Rate, you can see a small correlation:

image_qopjya.jpg




If I made any mistake, please let me know. But these diagrams support my statement (with wolfs data).


This picture shows the relative capacity overIR and of course you see a greater correlation.

image_tefliu.jpg


IR/ Left Capacity = high correlation
IR / Self Discharge = low correlation
Left Capacity / SD = high correlation

This brings me to the result, that IR give's you a picture of how "hard" a cell's life was and left capacity gives you a good picture of the internalageing effects of the cells. So the combination of both is quite sensefull.
 

Wolf

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
1,693
Well I am glad someone is using the database I created to get some interesting results.
Good work. Now just to say a couple of things.

1 I only created this data base to try and figure out if there is any correlation with IR and percent of capacity.
As we can plainly see there is and it has proven to be very effective to weed out poor cells in the beginning.

So for number 1 mission accomplished and the creation of the IR by part# sheet was created.
This is a work in progress and will be added to and edited as is necessary.
If you adhere to these m? numbers by cell manufacturer and part number your chances of getting an 80% plus of original capacity result are greatly improved.

2 The amount of data has also shown SD cells and some heaters. As my harvesting has evolved I have not come across very many heatersas anything over 100m? doesn't even get tested anymore and I am rapidly going to a 90m? cutoff.

The SDs on the other hand are still a thorn in our sides as there is no serious correlation so we just check them after 30 days what can I say.
I guess I won'tget my doctorate degree on SDs

Wolf


drbacke said:
This brings me to the result, that IR give's you a picture of how "hard" a cell's life was and left capacity gives you a good picture of the internalageing effects of the cells. So the combination of both is quite sensefull.

I find that iffilter just by cell part number and sort the IR by highest to lowest ............Lets take the UR18650FM and graph the m? and %Capacity correlation we see a definite m? to capacity correlation. We get this result ofcapacity within an IR range.


image_sywrqw.jpg


Wolf
 

drbacke

Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2019
Messages
60
Wolf said:
Well I am glad someone is using the database I created to get some interesting results.
Good work. Now just to say a couple of things.

1 I only created this data base to try and figure out if there is any correlation with IR and percent of capacity.
As we can plainly see there is and it has proven to be very effective to weed out poor cells in the beginning.

So for number 1 mission accomplished and the creation of the IR by part# sheet was created.
This is a work in progress and will be added to and edited as is necessary.
If you adhere to these m? numbers by cell manufacturer and part number your chances of getting an 80% plus of original capacity result are greatly improved.

2 The amount of data has also shown SD cells and some heaters. As my harvesting has evolved I have not come across very many heatersas anything over 100m? doesn't even get tested anymore and I am rapidly going to a 90m? cutoff.

The SDs on the other hand are still a thorn in our sides as there is no serious correlation so we just check them after 30 days what can I say.
I guess I won'tget my doctorate degree on SDs

Wolf

I enjoy working with your database very much and it helps me to understand things better or at least to question many of my own views about the harvesting process. Thanks a lot for that, your work allows me to make my harvesting process safer and more efficient in the future or at least to understand it more. I hope it didn't come across as criticism. It's just my way of understanding things.
At the moment some things still seem unclear to me, the correlations are very strange and partly even contradictory.
I will try to research these things and then share the results with you. I think there are different kinds of cell degradation which leads to different kinds of IR/SD/Capacity values.

---------
This picture is very interesting. I agree, this seems to be highly correlated. But there is also a very wide range of deviation, maybe we can understand how this all depends.
 

Wolf

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
1,693
drbacke said:
I enjoy working with your database very much and it helps me to understand things better or at least to question many of my own views about the harvesting process. Thanks a lot for that, your work allows me to make my harvesting process safer and more efficient in the future or at least to understand it more. I hope it didn't come across as criticism. It's just my way of understanding things.
At the moment some things still seem unclear to me, the correlations are very strange and partly even contradictory.
I will try to research these things and then share the results with you. I think there are different kinds of cell degradation which leads to different kinds of IR/SD/Capacity values.

Well I'm glad that several people on this board have found this data to be useful. It have been doing this for ~5 months now and are now seeing the results of that labor. Criticism I welcome it. I think its healthy after all we all are trying to find some answers.

Several things I want you to take into account when viewing this data.

1. In the beginning I was just taking random cells and recording them as you can see by the small baches.
2. There was no thought on what IR to eliminate from the tests and Voltage was also no consideration.
3. When it became apparent that IR was an influence and that precharging was a faster way of building the database that was introduced as you can see by the pretest measured Voltages.
4. High IR cells where again introduced into the data to give a balance and find the cutoffs.
5. Some cells where pulled from the testers before they were completely recharged after the test and may have indicated a SD in error.( I have long since changed that and let all cells finish charging).If caughton the SD check and because theIR readings indicated a good cellthey were recharged andset aside for another 30 day waiting test. After that they will be entered.
6. Post recharge voltage was not checked except the occasional spot check and the results usually where in the 4.16V to 4.19V range.
7. My SD cutoff is set to 4.13V with conditional formatting. Compared to many who use 4.05V as their criteria mine is relatively higher.
8. from cell #4500 on I started the IR experiment. (Missing some cells there in the first 100? Not sure what happened. I'llsee if I can find them in a previous version)(Found and fixed) As you can see the capacity results are very good from there on. There are some low numbers in there but that again was to find the cutoff on certain part number cells.
9. I now do not precharge any cells >2.0V. If the IR is acceptable they go straight to the charger/tester. If the cell is <2.0V and the IR is acceptable they get precharged withCC/CV4.2V50mA.

Wolf
 

Cherry67

Member
Joined
May 13, 2018
Messages
506

Kna

New member
Joined
Sep 5, 2019
Messages
7
Wolf said:
.../... Now there is such a thing on the Sanyos as a too low of an IR andmaybe I should have mentioned that. The chemistry in question really is usually ICR low drain and anything <30m? on that type of battery is to be questioned. I have had some UR18650FM cells with an IR of 23m? to 26m?. Those normally run in the >45m? range,that were almost instant heaters.

(Old topic, sorry, but there is so much to read here...)

@Wolf & drbacke

I read recently a paper ont the effects of overdischarge on LIon batteries, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4957210/

it was about the appearance of internal short circuits (ISCr), more or less severe, due to the decomposition of the SEI and the dissolution of the copper.

I thought it might interfere with the internal resistance of the cell, to the point of "disguising" it as normal IR, or even bringing it below the threshold of the brand-new-cell value. The ultimate theoretical step would be an IR of almost 0m? in the event of a complete short-circuit.

I also thought that this could unfortunately call into question all or part of the work done on IR in the event of overdischarge victim cells.

What do you think about that?

Kna
 

Wolf

Active member
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
1,693
Kna said:
I also thought that this could unfortunately call into question all or part of the work done on IR in the event of overdischarge victim cells.

What do you think about that?

Kna
Kna,
Actually the research paper and your commentsprove that IR measurements are very important. Additionally you quoted my comment on Sanyo cells with low IR being almost instant heaters.
Obviously if a cell has too low of an IR it becomes a very efficient short circuit and the last time I accidently took a wire from positive to negative it got hot very quickly. :D
Alow drain cell (ICR chemistry) with lower than normal IR will show up either as a heater or will be a SD. These cellsgenerally have a 30m? to 75m? IR and anything below that is suspect. Going the other way generally anything >80m? will tend to have a diminished SOH, can be a heater, SD or both.

High drain cells will always have an IR of <30m? mostly in the 12m? to 25m? range. Themanganese nickel hybrid chemistry allows for lower IR and high drain application.

I have recharged many low drain chemistry cells that have had an acceptable IR see my chart herethat where below 1.5V and some even down to 500mv, tested them with at least 10 cycles and have found them to be great cells. Does that mean all of them are perfect of course not. That is why we test.
Obviouslyif a cell has an IR of 5m? or less it has a short. So its SOH is defunct.

So as far as I am concerned as long as a cell is within its defined m? range, it is a great candidate for testing and the chances that the cellsSOH is acceptable and will produce the desired results are greatly enhanced.

As far as calling into question all or part ofthe work done on IR I don't think so. With 6222 Cells in my database "here"I can assure you that IR can predetermine the cells performance even in the event of an over discharge "victim" cell.

That's what I think about that!

Wolf
 
Top