Chevrolet Bolt & Bolt EUV

Notice what happens after the fireman starts spraying water, at about 1:20

Indeed. 2 things that struck me is 1) how casual they were at first approaching the car with all the smoke coming out of it and 2) water??? :shock: on a Li fire?

goldbrick said:

Indeed. 2 things that struck me is 1) how casual they were at first approaching the car with all the smoke coming out of it and 2) water??? :shock: on a Li fire?

Click to expand...

I'm guessing your concern is about the possible reaction of lithium to water, but https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/Training/AFV/Emergency-Response-Guides/Chevrolet/Chevrolet-Bolt-EV-2017-2019-QRG.ashx says to use water.

I've seen numerous Tesla fire videos and they have had to use a LOT of water to keep the batteries cool including after re-ignitions. https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/2016_Model_S_Emergency_Response_Sheet_en.pdf calls for using large amounts of water. I just found https://www.tesla.com/firstresponders and haven't gone thru most of the files there.

Here's one a Model X fire video I'd seen long ago: https://insideevs.com/news/341410/tesla-model-x-on-fire-in-california-video/.

Very interesting. BatteryUniversity takes a similar approach since they claim EV batteries don't contain a lot of Li. I'm guessing the firemen probably did as they were trained to do and it was probably the right approach.

A large Li-ion fire, such as in an EV, may need to burn out. Water with copper material can be used, but this may not be available and is costly for fire halls. Increasingly, experts advise using water even with large Li-ion fires. Water lowers combustion temperature but is not recommended for battery fires containing lithium-metal.

When encountering a fire with a lithium-metal battery, only use a Class D fire extinguisher. Lithium-metal contains plenty of lithium that reacts with water and makes the fire worse. As the number of EVs grows, so must the methods to extinguish such fires.

https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/safety_concerns_with_li_ion

Just a reminder that "Battery University" is more like a farm state college. ;-) If they say the sky is blue then it likely is, but when they try to explain complicated things like battery chemistry, it's best to get a second opinion, to mix metaphors.

The guidance at https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/consumer-alert-chevrolet-bolt-recall-fire-risk differs somewhat from https://my.chevrolet.com/how-to-support/safety/boltevrecall.

Unfortunately, https://www.nhtsa.gov/vehicle/2019/CHEVROLET/BOLT%252520EV/5%252520HB/FWD#recalls doesn't show a recall yet. The associated document under the investigations section (https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/inv/2020/INOA-PE20016-7505.PDF) provides little info.

I haven't had a chance to dig further into this yet.

cwerdna said:

The guidance at https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/consumer-alert-chevrolet-bolt-recall-fire-risk differs somewhat from https://my.chevrolet.com/how-to-support/safety/boltevrecall.

Click to expand...

The NHTSA guidance makes it sound much more ominous than the specific issue described at Chevy's recall site.

I just hope this doesn't hurt their sales too much, as they were just gathering steam. It doesn't look like the issue is in the new packs.

DougWantsALeaf said:

I just hope this doesn't hurt their sales too much, as they were just gathering steam. It doesn't look like the issue is in the new packs.

Click to expand...

This is more investigative than any real issue. Fires in gassers happen at a much higher rate but most of those are not mysteries. Chevy is just being overly cautious; a rarity in the Auto World.

DougWantsALeaf said:

I just hope this doesn't hurt their sales too much, as they were just gathering steam. It doesn't look like the issue is in the new packs.

Click to expand...

One of the theories that I've heard is that as weaker cells age, their internal resistance increases. The BMS software may not account for this properly, causing those weak cells to overcharge, overheat, and start a fire.

Bottom line - I'm not sure we know enough to say whether the new packs are safe or the issue is one of age (hence the new packs aren't old enough to have this problem yet).

I hope GM gets to the bottom of this, but I'm not overly concerned. The recall's solution is to limit the SoC to 90%, which I already do via Hilltop Reserve.

GetOffYourGas said:

One of the theories that I've heard is that as weaker cells age, their internal resistance increases. The BMS software may not account for this properly, causing those weak cells to overcharge, overheat, and start a fire.

Click to expand...

That seems unlikely to me - what is the max pack/cell voltage that GM charges to?

Monitoring cell voltages and ensuring that bad things don't happen is the #1 job of the BMS - whether that's monitoring for high voltages during charging, or low voltages when discharging.

GetOffYourGas said:

I hope GM gets to the bottom of this, but I'm not overly concerned. The recall's solution is to limit the SoC to 90%, which I already do via Hilltop Reserve.

Click to expand...

I'm surprised that this isn't the default setting of the car - both to improve battery life and efficiency so that you have regen available at the start of every drive. It does also improve safety - the higher the voltage of the cell, the more energy there is to be released in the event of a cell failure.

Part of me wonders if the problem is actually outside of the cells, in some of the other components located in the pack, eg in the BMS or charger. If those parts also catch on fire, the cells are close enough that it could cause a cell to catch on fire, though it seems unlikely.

Hopefully GM and LG get to the bottom of this quickly and are able to resolve the issue at minimal cost.

DaveEV said:

GetOffYourGas said:

One of the theories that I've heard is that as weaker cells age, their internal resistance increases. The BMS software may not account for this properly, causing those weak cells to overcharge, overheat, and start a fire.

Click to expand...

That seems unlikely to me - what is the max pack/cell voltage that GM charges to?

Monitoring cell voltages and ensuring that bad things don't happen is the #1 job of the BMS - whether that's monitoring for high voltages during charging, or low voltages when discharging.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure I follow you. A proper BMS will monitor cell voltages and ensure that bad things don't happen. So why is it unlikely that an improperly programmed BMS could cause this problem? It reads to me like you support this theory more than presenting an alternative. Unless it is the question of aging that you disagree with? But as cells age, those differences could widen, making the BMS ever more important over time. It has to assure that weaker cells don't overcharge or overheat.

So I am not a battery expert by any means, but I do have an electrical background. Could you provide a deeper explanation here? What subtlety am I missing?

GetOffYourGas said:

The recall's solution is to limit the SoC to 90%, which I already do via Hilltop Reserve.

Click to expand...

That is not the recall solution, it is the 'what to do until we figure out the problem and issue a recall.'

Answer me this: if GM has not figured out the cause of the fires yet, why are you confident that the 90% SoC charge will protect you ?

SageBrush said:

That is not the recall solution, it is the 'what to do until we figure out the problem and issue a recall.'

Answer me this: if GM has not figured out the cause of the fires yet, why are you confident that the 90% SoC charge will protect you ?

Click to expand...

Correct on the first point.

At about 1:15 into the video at https://my.chevrolet.com/how-to-support/safety/boltevrecall, they found that of the vehicles they inspected, they were full or nearly full.

There was little or no useful NHTSA documentation the other day but I learned of https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2020/RCLRPT-20V701-2513.PDF today, which also mentions high SoC. But yes, AFAIK, they don't know the cause yet and the high SoC might be a red herring and just a coincidence as people may just plug in out of habit.

So, for the time being, they're asking people to not charge above hilltop reserve or 90% and they're issuing an update to limit it automatically. There's been plenty of discussion/speculation on https://www.chevybolt.org/ on what they might do as a final remedy to Bolt drivers but that would depend on them knowing the root cause and the cost of the remedy/remedies.

GetOffYourGas said:

I'm not sure I follow you. A proper BMS will monitor cell voltages and ensure that bad things don't happen. So why is it unlikely that an improperly programmed BMS could cause this problem? It reads to me like you support this theory more than presenting an alternative. Unless it is the question of aging that you disagree with? But as cells age, those differences could widen, making the BMS ever more important over time. It has to assure that weaker cells don't overcharge or overheat.

Click to expand...

It would be quite the firmware bug that allows cells to get so far out of balance to allow a cell to spontaneously combust. It would take charging the cell well above 4.2V.

If the BMS was not reading a module's voltage properly, it would almost certainly have to trigger some sort of other error code that would shut things down.

I think it's more likely that there's some sort of defect in the separator of the cells which is causing issues, or some other sort of hardware defect. Remember the issue that caused Samsung phones to catch on fire? Or the Boeing 787 battery fires?

Right... there was https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200608/06-0825E/ regarding the defective Sony batteries that caused a TON of laptops from many different brands to be recalled.

Or, there could be a short circuit within the pack that might be between the modules or within the modules themselves.

SageBrush said:

GetOffYourGas said:

The recall's solution is to limit the SoC to 90%, which I already do via Hilltop Reserve.

Click to expand...

That is not the recall solution, it is the 'what to do until we figure out the problem and issue a recall.'

Answer me this: if GM has not figured out the cause of the fires yet, why are you confident that the 90% SoC charge will protect you ?

Click to expand...

What I meant is that the current recall will limit your SoC to 90%, but you knew that. So why are you being pedantic and adversarial about it?

cwerdna addressed your question with some evidence. I am satisfied with the current level of risk I have with the car set to Hilltop Reserve and parked outside.

GetOffYourGas said:

I am satisfied with the current level of risk I have with the car set to Hilltop Reserve and parked outside.

Click to expand...

Funny.

You have NO IDEA what the risk is, because GM has not figured out the cause(s)
And it should be obvious that until the causes(s) are identified, the advice to reduce max SoC as a risk mitigation is a guess at best; a sop to owners like you at worst.

Ok, sure. And I have no idea the risk of getting hit by a bus next time I take my dog for a walk. 5 Bolts have caught on fire out of well over 50,000 sold. I'm comfortable saying the risk is low. And I've also taken the necessary precautions to minimize impact if it does. I keep no valuables in the car, and park in my driveway, away from the house.

I'm not sure what else you would have me do, maybe sell the car and buy a Leaf+?