150+C high power cells
- Thread starter CroDriver
- Start date
BMI
100 W
CroDriver said:
Saft are a supplier of batteries and cells to the military so as a general rule they do not supply the general public.
BMI
100 W
LiFeTech Energy (formerly BMI) are proud to be official licensees for Phostech Lithium (the inventor/patent holder of the LiFePO4 battery). You will see the small blue circle on the right side of our LiFeTech logo. This is the Phostech logo. All of our Phostech cells use the very highest grade of LiFePO4 powder manufactured in Germany by Sud-Chemie under license from Phostech. This is the powder we use in our cells which gives them superior performance to Headway's and other cells which look similar in physical appearance only.
We expect to release our new genuine Phostech 20Ah High Energy 40176 cell very soon. This will use the very latest "P2" LiFePO4 formulation which is being supplied to us by Phostech. This cell is undergoing testing at the moment in Japan.
As you can see Phostech powder being the very best in the world is made in Germany (and definitely not in China).
The Chinese battery companies don't have the technology as yet to manufacture good quality cells rated above 10C which is why the great majority of Chinese made cells such as Thundersky, Sky Energy, China Hi-Power, etc. are all rated around 3-5C only.
We expect to release our new genuine Phostech 20Ah High Energy 40176 cell very soon. This will use the very latest "P2" LiFePO4 formulation which is being supplied to us by Phostech. This cell is undergoing testing at the moment in Japan.
As you can see Phostech powder being the very best in the world is made in Germany (and definitely not in China).
The Chinese battery companies don't have the technology as yet to manufacture good quality cells rated above 10C which is why the great majority of Chinese made cells such as Thundersky, Sky Energy, China Hi-Power, etc. are all rated around 3-5C only.
olaf-lampe
10 kW
@BMI
Very interesting info,
is this what is called nano-phoshate? Which was patented/invented? by the MIT or A123?
If not, how does it compare to the well known a123-nano phospate cells?
Sorry for supporting a thread-hijack with my reply...
Olaf
Very interesting info,
is this what is called nano-phoshate? Which was patented/invented? by the MIT or A123?
If not, how does it compare to the well known a123-nano phospate cells?
Sorry for supporting a thread-hijack with my reply...
Olaf
BMI
100 W
olaf-lampe said:
No..no..no.. you have got it all wrong olaf-lampe!
We invented it and A123 stole it from us.
It sounds like you are not aware of the whole story regarding the LiFePO4 battery which was invented and patented by Dr John Goodenough and his design team at the University of Texas. One of the members of Dr Goodenough's original design team went to MIT to copy the battery for A123 Systems.
Feel free to PM me your email address and I will send you a very interesting article on the invention of the LiFePO4 battery and how MIT/A123 stole it and the patent law suits which have followed as a result.
AndyH
10 kW
BMI said:
Armin - please help me understand. What is your connection with Phostech?
If I understand the progression correctly, Dr. Goodenough made the first cells. Phostech patented their formula. Other companies make their own formulas. You buy 'special powder' from Phostech - only one of the makers of powder.
Do you really think that it's proper to suggest that BMI or LiFeTech "invented it" and the rest of the world "stole it from" you?! A bit over the top, don't you think?!
AndyH
10 kW
From Valence Technologies Feb 9, 2010 10Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/100209/VALENCE-TECHNOLOGY-INC_10-Q/)
On February 14, 2006, Hydro-Quebec filed an action against the Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Hydro-Quebec v. Valence Technology, Civil Action No. A06CA111). An amended complaint was filed April 13, 2006. A stay on the case was imposed pending a reexamination of the two patents by the USPTO. The stay imposed by the Court has been lifted following completion of the reexaminations of the two patents. The claims in the two patents originally asserted by Hydro-Quebec were found to be unpatentable by the USPTO. On January 8, 2009 Hydro-Quebec filed a second amended complaint, wherein Hydro-Quebec alleges that Saphion ® I Technology, the technology utilized in all of the Company’s commercial products, infringes certain claims in the U.S. Reexamined Patent Nos. 5,910,382 and 6,514,640 exclusively licensed to Hydro-Quebec. Hydro-Quebec seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages. The Company has filed a response denying the allegations in the second amended complaint. A Markman hearing to determine the scope of the asserted claims in the two reexamined patents has been completed and the parties are awaiting a decision by the Court.
On January 31, 2007, Valence filed a claim against Phostech Lithium Inc. in the Federal Court in Canada (Valence Technology, Inc. v. Phostech Lithium Inc. Court File No. T-219-07) alleging infringement of Valence Canadian Patent 2,395,115. Subsequently, on April 2, 2007, Valence filed an amended claim alleging infringement of its Canadian Patents 2,483,918 and 2,466,366. The action is in the discovery stage. The Company is seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief for the acts of Phostech in manufacturing, using and selling phosphate cathode material that infringes the asserted Valence Canadian Patents.
On February 14, 2006, Hydro-Quebec filed an action against the Company in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Hydro-Quebec v. Valence Technology, Civil Action No. A06CA111). An amended complaint was filed April 13, 2006. A stay on the case was imposed pending a reexamination of the two patents by the USPTO. The stay imposed by the Court has been lifted following completion of the reexaminations of the two patents. The claims in the two patents originally asserted by Hydro-Quebec were found to be unpatentable by the USPTO. On January 8, 2009 Hydro-Quebec filed a second amended complaint, wherein Hydro-Quebec alleges that Saphion ® I Technology, the technology utilized in all of the Company’s commercial products, infringes certain claims in the U.S. Reexamined Patent Nos. 5,910,382 and 6,514,640 exclusively licensed to Hydro-Quebec. Hydro-Quebec seeks injunctive relief and monetary damages. The Company has filed a response denying the allegations in the second amended complaint. A Markman hearing to determine the scope of the asserted claims in the two reexamined patents has been completed and the parties are awaiting a decision by the Court.
On January 31, 2007, Valence filed a claim against Phostech Lithium Inc. in the Federal Court in Canada (Valence Technology, Inc. v. Phostech Lithium Inc. Court File No. T-219-07) alleging infringement of Valence Canadian Patent 2,395,115. Subsequently, on April 2, 2007, Valence filed an amended claim alleging infringement of its Canadian Patents 2,483,918 and 2,466,366. The action is in the discovery stage. The Company is seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief for the acts of Phostech in manufacturing, using and selling phosphate cathode material that infringes the asserted Valence Canadian Patents.
The Mighty Volt
1 MW
I have been in communication with a chinese company who claims a Maximum Continuous Discharging Current of 22000mA(10C) on a 3.2 v 22650 {2.2Ah} Lifepo cell.
AndyH
10 kW
The Mighty Volt said:
A number of cells have been on the street for years with 10C or greater performance - like A123-Systems and PSI and Headway and...
The Mighty Volt
1 MW
AndyH said:
None of which ship from china for $3.48 per piece.
Besides, I was just referring to the statement above about the traditionally low discharge rate of the Chinese LifePo products. I think 20C is a decent rate of discharge for such a cheap cell.
Peace.
TMV
BMI
100 W
I have also tested some cells in the past from China which exceeded 10C. The problem I found with these cells was they had a very short cycle life before complete failure.The Mighty Volt said:
You never know... you could be on to something. Perhaps you can post the discharge curves at high C rates and the resulting cycle life.
Neither A123 Systems nor PSI are Chinese companies so they don't count.
TylerDurden
100 GW
About time...AndyH said:
The EU concluded the same thing a year ago.
The Mighty Volt
1 MW
BMI said:
Hi BMI
I agree with you on the susceptibility of these cells, which is why I have ordered a sample for testing. I will post results as soon as I have some. Cheers.
BMI
100 W
AndyH said:
Regarding a discussion I had with our head office / factory management only a few weeks ago the wording to me from the top management was that "LiFeTech Energy is the official licensee for Phostech". This was in reference to the very latest Phostech powder formulation "P2 formula" which is being exclusively supplied to LiFeTech and will be used in our new 20Ah cell which we have been asked to manufacture especially for a major US company.
One of the two major/most important criteria for this cell as specified by the US manufacturer who will use this cell in their products is that the cell must use genuine Phostech powder since they do not want to face any possible law suits in the years to come.
I am not allowed to say any more about the new cell until it is officially released which should be before the end of April. When the exhaustive testing has been completed in Japan I will be sure to post the spec. sheet here so you guys will see it here first.
BMI
100 W
The Mighty Volt said:
It will take you a long time to do a thousand cycles (or more) of testing. Though if previous experience is anything to go by they will fail much sooner. Perhaps you can get a life cycle test report from the manufacturer?
AndyH
10 kW
BMI said:
That's the point of my question. You LICENSE material from Phostech but you are not Phostech. (If Phostech owned the Panjit Group who owns LiFeTech, then they wouldn't have to license anything, right?!) Therefore it doesn't seem that you have a 'dog' in any of the patent 'fights'...and therefore nobody's stolen anything from you...
BMI
100 W
AndyH said:
It is an agreement between companies that have a very close association. We have a close working/business relationship with Phostech. Phostech manufacturers the powder and this material is supplied to us under an exclusive agreement to manufacture it into a high quality useable product (cell).
I am not sure how else to word it.
The Mighty Volt
1 MW
@BMI
I will request one before I pay for the sample.
Considering the price, if I got 1000 cycles out of them I would not be toooooo unhappy.
Cheers and thanks for your advice, it is appreciated.
I will request one before I pay for the sample.
Considering the price, if I got 1000 cycles out of them I would not be toooooo unhappy.
Cheers and thanks for your advice, it is appreciated.
BMI
100 W
The Mighty Volt said:@BMI
I will request one before I pay for the sample.
Considering the price, if I got 1000 cycles out of them I would not be toooooo unhappy.
Cheers and thanks for your advice, it is appreciated.
About 12 to 18 months ago (I guess- how time flies) I ordered some 26650 cells made in China which were supposed to be an ideal replacement for A123 cells. The discharge curve looked good which is why I bought some. I made them into packs for a friend as a motorcycle starting battery. The cells lasted no more than a few months before the pack totally died.
I learned the hard way with cheap Chinese cells which are supposed to be as good as the real thing.
The Mighty Volt
1 MW
12-18 months is a long time in Lithium land.
The seller even rang me long distance to try and close a deal.
Guess that could mean anything, of course.
The seller even rang me long distance to try and close a deal.
Guess that could mean anything, of course.
AndyH
10 kW
The Mighty Volt said:AndyH said:
None of which ship from china for $3.48 per piece.
Besides, I was just referring to the statement above about the traditionally low discharge rate of the Chinese LifePo products. I think 20C is a decent rate of discharge for such a cheap cell.
Peace.
TMV
There is that.
Nice find! Congrats!The Mighty Volt
1 MW
Thanks.
I have made tenuous inquiry about getting a sample of 50 cells from China, for testing. I will then take suggestions on how to test them, and will post results here.
I have made tenuous inquiry about getting a sample of 50 cells from China, for testing. I will then take suggestions on how to test them, and will post results here.
liveforphysics
100 TW
The Mighty Volt said:
Useful cell testing... it's more difficult than pack building by a long shot. lol
Similar threads
