The geek with a cynical view: Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems 30-2013

I

n the Boeing 787 Dreamliner's first year of service, at least four aircraft suffered from electrical system problems stemming from itslithium-ion batteries. Although teething problems are common within the first year of a new aircraft design's life, after a number of incidents including an electrical fire aboard an All Nippon Airways 787, and a similar fire found by maintenance workers on a landedJapan Airlines 787 at Boston's Logan International Airport, the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ordered a review into the design and manufacture of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, following five incidents in five days involving the aircraft, mostly involved with problems with the batteries and electrical systems. This was followed with a full grounding of the entire Boeing 787 fleet, the first such grounding since that of DC-10s in 1979.[1] It is reported that the plane has had two major battery thermal runawayevents in 52,000 flight hours, which was substantially below the 10 million flight hours predicted by Boeing, and had done so in a dangerous manner.[2]

Contents [hide]
1 Timeline
2 Groundings
3 Solution
4 See also
5 References
Timeline

In December 2012, Boeing CEO James McNerney told media outlets that the problems were no greater than those experienced by the company with the introduction of other new models, such as the Boeing 777.[3] However, on January 7, 2013, a battery overheated and started a fire in an empty 787 operated by Japan Airlines (JAL) at Boston's Logan International Airport.[4][5] On January 9, United Airlinesreported a problem in one of its six 787s with the wiring in the same area as the battery fire on JAL's airliner; subsequently, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board opened a safety probe.[6]

On January 11, 2013, the FAA announced a comprehensive review of the 787's critical systems, including the design, manufacture and assembly of the aircraft. U.S. Department of Transportation secretary Ray LaHood stated the administration was "looking for the root causes" behind the recent issues. The head of the FAA, Michael Huerta, said that so far nothing found "suggests [the 787] is not safe".[7] Japan's transport ministry have also launched an investigation in response.[8]

On January 16, 2013, an All Nippon Airways (ANA) 787 made an emergency landing at Takamatsu Airport on Shikoku Island after the flight crew received a computer warning that there was smoke inside one of the electrical compartments.[9][10] ANA said that there was an error message in the cockpit citing a battery malfunction. Passengers and crew were evacuated using the emergency slides.[11]According to The Register, there are no fire-suppression systems in the electrical compartments holding batteries, only smoke detectors.[12]

US-based aviation regulators' oversight into the 2007 safety approval and FAA certification of the 787 has now come under scrutiny, as a key US Senate committee prepares for a hearing into the procedures of aviation safety certification "in coming weeks". However, an FAA spokesperson defended their 2007 safety certification of the 787 by saying, "the whole aviation system is designed so that if the worst case happens, there are systems in place to prevent that from interfering with other systems on the plane".[13]

On February 12, 2013 the Wall Street Journal reported that "Aviation safety investigators are examining whether the formation of microscopic structures known as dendrites inside the Boeing Co. 787's lithium-ion batteries played a role in twin incidents that prompted the fleet to be grounded nearly a month ago."[14]
Groundings

On January 16, 2013, both major Japanese airlines ANA and JAL announced that they were voluntarily grounding or suspending flights for their fleets of 787s after multiple incidents involving different 787s, including emergency landings. These two carriers operate 24 of the 50 Dreamliners delivered to date.[15][16] The grounding could cost ANA over $1.1 million a day.[17]

Wikinews has related news:FAA orders review of Boeing 787 Dreamliners following week of incidents

On January 16, 2013, the FAA issued an emergency airworthiness directive ordering all U.S.-based airlines to ground their Boeing 787s until yet-to-be-determined modifications are made to the electrical system to reduce the risk of the battery overheating or catching fire.[18] This is the first time that the FAA has grounded an airliner type since 1979.[1] The FAA also announced plans to conduct an extensive review of the 787's critical systems. The focus of the review will be on the safety of the lithium-ion batteries [1] made of lithium cobalt oxide (LiCoO2). The 787 battery contract was signed in 2005,[19] when LiCoO2 batteries were the only type of lithium aerospace battery available, but since then newer and safer[20] types (such as LiFePO), which provide less reaction energy during thermal runaway, have become available.[21][22] FAA approved a 787 battery in 2007 with nine "special conditions".[23][24] A battery approved by FAA (through Mobile Power Solutions) was made by Rose Electronics using Kokam cells,[25] but the batteries installed in the 787 are made by Yuasa.[26]

Three All Nippon Airways 787 aircraft grounded at Tokyo on January 27, 2013

On January 20, the NTSB declared that overvoltage was not the cause of the Boston incident, as voltage did not exceed the battery limit of 32 V,[27] and the charging unit passed tests. The battery had signs of short circuiting and thermal runaway.[28] Despite this, on January 24 the NTSB announced that it had not yet pinpointed the cause of the Boston fire; the FAA will not allow U.S.-based Dreamliners to fly again until the problem is found and corrected. In a press briefing that day, NTSB Chairwoman Deborah Hersman said that the NTSB had found evidence of failure of multiple safety systems designed to prevent these battery problems, and stated that fire must never happen on an airplane.[29] The Japan Transport Safety Board (JTSB) has said on January 23 that the battery in ANA jets in Japan reached a maximum voltage of 31 V (lower than the 32 V limit like the Boston JAL 787), but had a sudden unexplained voltage drop[30] to near zero.[31] All cells had signs of thermal damage before thermal runaway.[32] ANA and JAL had replaced several 787 batteries before the mishaps.[31] As of January 29, 2013, JTSB approved the Yuasa factory quality control [33][34] while the American NTSB continues to look for defects in the Boston battery.[35]

Industry experts disagree on consequences of the grounding: Airbus is confident that Boeing will resolve the issue[36] and that no airlines will switch plane type,[37] while other experts see the problem as "costly"[38] and "could take upwards of a year".[39]

The only U.S.-based airline that operates the Dreamliner is United Airlines, which has six.[40] Chile's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGAC) grounded LAN Airlines' three 787s.[41] The Indian Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) directed Air India to ground its six Dreamliners. The Japanese Transport Ministry made the ANA and JAL groundings official and indefinite following the FAA announcement.[42] The European Aviation Safety Agency has also followed the FAA's advice and grounded the only two European 787s operated by LOT Polish Airlines.[43] Qatar Airways has announced that they are grounding their five Dreamliners.[44] Ethiopian Air was the final operator to announce temporary groundings of its four Dreamliners.[45]

As of January 17, 2013, all 50 of the aircraft delivered to date have been grounded.[45][46][47] On January 18, Boeing announced that it was halting 787 deliveries until the battery problem is resolved.[48] On February 4, 2013, the FAA said it will permit Boeing to conduct test flights of 787 aircraft to gather additional data.[49]
Solution

The Federal Aviation Administration decided on April 19, 2013 to allow US Dreamliners return to service after changes were made to their battery systems.[50] Japanese authorities announced they were doing the same for their airplanes. The causes of the battery failures are still unknown.
See also

The geek with a cynical view

Monday, September 30, 2013

Boeing 787 Dreamliner battery problems 30-2013

Search This Blog

Links

Labels