We now know why the Samsung Note 7 exploded

We now know why the Samsung Note 7 exploded

We now know why the Samsung Note 7 exploded

We now know why the Samsung Note 7 exploded

 
 

Engineers over at Instrumental Technologies has analysed the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 and revealed exactly why the phone's battery exploded.

To put things into simple terms, the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 failed due to improper tolerances. In engineering and manufacturing, tolerance is the acceptable deviation in any magnitude, in this case the space between objects. This is to ensure a good fit/easy manufacturing, to ensure product safety/reliability or to compensate for variation in component size when under different thermal (or other) loads. In simple terms, tolerances are in place to ensure that a device works within its intended specifications. 

Traditionally when the dimensions of a component move beyond a certain tolerance when they are under thermal loads (become too big or too small when they are hot or cold), they are rejected or marked as non-compliant. In the case of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7, the battery was placed into the phone with very tight tolerances, with the battery being as close as 0.1mm to the rest of the phone in some cases and never further than 0.5mm from the edge of the batteries CNC-machined battery pocket.  

When the phone is placed under load several parts of the phone increase slightly in size, including the battery, which means that the phone was able to exert pressure on the battery, allowing the battery's positive cell layer and negative cell layer to be squeezed closely together. When this happens the insulation material between these two layers becomes useless and energy can be fed from one layer to the other, causing a ramp up in temperatures and a huge fire-risk.

  

We now know why the Samsung Note 7 exploded

Samsung was packing a lot of battery into a very tight space

 

The failure of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 was due to Samsung placing a large battery into a compact space, leaving minimal design tolerances in the X and Y axis (Less than 0.1mm in places) and almost no room in the Z-axis where a typical allowance for a battery is 10%.

Samsung uses a 3,500mAh battery into the Note 7 to give it a competitive battery life, though it is thought that this would have lead to failure even if the "explosion" issues didn't occur. Over time the battery in the phone would have expanded, resulting in a phone which would have warped and changed its shape as a result, which again is a negative outcome for Galaxy Note 7 users.  

Instrumental Technologies deemed that the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 would need to use a battery that was smaller than both the Galaxy Note 5 and iPhone 7 Plus to be safe for use, making the devices' battery life short and not competitive in the modern marketplace.  In the eyes of the engineers at Instrumental Technologies, the design of the Note 7 has "no competitive salvageable design", effectively making the phones design a dead weight for Samsung. 

 

You can join the discussion on Samsung's Galaxy Note 7 on the OC3D Forums

 

«Prev 1 2 Next»

Most Recent Comments

06-12-2016, 08:06:00

aliG
Is it that hard to create new batteries? Longer lasting etc? Phones weakest spot is battery nowadays...

I don't know if my posted article below is fake or not, but there you can read some promising news in battery science soon.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/1303...r-over-the-airQuote

06-12-2016, 08:31:18

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by aliG View Post
Is it that hard to create new batteries? Longer lasting etc? Phones weakest spot is battery nowadays...

I don't know if my posted article below is fake or not, but there you can read some promising news in battery science soon.

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/1303...r-over-the-air
The problem with battery technology is that we hear about "revolutionary new battery technologies" every few months and none of them ever seem to materialise.

One big problem here is that these new batteries usually are really hard to produce or have short life expectancies.

In the case of the Samsung Note 7 they just needed to not be as aggressive with the size of the phone, a redesigned model with some extra thickness and width could have prevented this whole issue. Would anyone even care if the phone was 1mm thicker in each dimension?

Hopefully battery technology will get better in time, but progress is a lot slower than what most people expect.Quote

06-12-2016, 10:10:10

SuB
The issue with emerging battery technology is that the big companies buy it and disappear it. More reliable, safer and longer lasting batteries are absolutely not in the best interests of these companies who have almost-guaranteed sales for the life of any battery-toting product...

There were some super capacitor ones that really did look like they were going to change things that were around a few years back, created by a student, never heard about those once they hit the big news outlets.. assumed bought and stfu ordered.Quote

06-12-2016, 19:06:48

Kushiro
There was a recent one with a non-degrading battery. But hey, wonder whats going to happen to that

Now if a company like Samsung were able to nab one and find a way to get past any patents etc and then implement the battery hoho....Quote

07-12-2016, 17:00:51

Burger May
Alot if the time ut is simpky tgat the press overestinates what sciebtists have actually reported.
Simple headlining and geappibg attention without thoroughly checking the real original source, rather than some other article or release from another party etc.
1. 10% of all peer review marterials are falsifed. Shocking aye, but that is human nature for you.
2. Overstated or restated headlining from press, who are not experts in field and use their own bias.
Just think of how much information we thonk we know tpday as fact, but when truly analysed it is simply hype, soemones or some groups bias, recognised even by themsleves or not, or simply writtem to get some work done and look good

How many cure cancer, cause cancer, prove bible is false, racism, evolution prorved wrong, total crap we arw all told. Over years of it the background noise is impressive at disinformation, intenedd or not.
Battery life etc is exactly the same. Most lilely the scientists did not say any such thing. Their companies press might have had. The person writing the article might have etc.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.