The short version — don’t buy cheap cells! The cheaper brands were found to have higher levels of manufacturing defects which can lead them to being unsafe. All the nitty-gritty details are available in the report, which can be downloaded for free from Lumafield, as well as the Tested video they did with [Adam] below.
Actually we’ve been talking here at Hackaday over at our virtual water-cooler (okay, okay, our Discord server) about how to store lithium-ion batteries and we learned about this cool bit of kit: the BAT-SAFE. Maybe check that out if you’re stickler for safety like us! (Thanks Maya Posch!)
Looking for a unique vacation spot? Have at least $10 million USD burning a hole in your pocket? If so, then you’re just the sort of customer the rather suspiciously named “GRU Space” is looking for. They’re currently taking non-refundable $1,000 deposits from individuals looking to stay at their currently non-existent hotel on the lunar surface. They don’t expect you’ll be able to check in until at least the early 2030s, and the $1K doesn’t actually guarantee you’ll be selected as one of the guests who will be required to cough up the final eight-figure ticket price before liftoff, but at least admission into the history books is free with your stay.
This never happened.
The whole idea reminds us of Mars One, which promised to send the first group of colonists to the Red Planet by 2024. They went bankrupt in 2019 after collecting ~$100 deposits from more than 4,000 applicants, and we probably don’t have to tell you that they never actually shot anyone into space. Admittedly, the Moon is a far more attainable goal, and the commercial space industry has made enormous strides in the decade since Mars One started taking applications. But we’re still not holding our breath that GRU Space will be leaving any mints on pillows at one-sixth gravity.
Speaking of something which actually does have a chance of reaching the Moon on time — on Saturday, NASA rolled out the massive Space Launch System (SLS) rocket that will carry a crew of four towards our nearest celestial neighbor during the Artemis II mission. There’s still plenty of prep work to do, including a dress rehearsal that’s set to take place in the next couple of weeks, but we’re getting very close. Artemis II won’t actually land on the Moon, instead performing a lunar flyby, but it will still be the first time we’ve sent humans beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) since Apollo 17 in 1972. We can’t wait for some 4K Earthrise video.
These days ready-to-use DC-DC converters are everywhere, with some of the cheaper ones even being safe to use without an immediate risk to life and limb(s). This piques one’s curiosity when browsing various online shopping platforms that are quite literally flooded with e.g. QS-4884CCCV-1800W clones of a DC-DC boost converter. Do they really manage 1800 Watt even without active cooling? Are they perhaps a good deal? These were some of the questions that [Josh] over at the [Signal Drift] channel set out to answer.
The only real ‘datasheet’ for this module seems to come courtesy of a Floridian company who also calls it the 36843-PS, but it features specifications that are repeated across store listings so it might as well by the official ‘datasheet’. This module is marketed as being designed for the charging of lead-acid and similar batteries, including the boosting of PV solar panel outputs, though you’d really want to use an MPPT charger for that.
With this use case in mind, it’s probably no surprise to see on the oscilloscope shots under load that it has a tragic 100 kHz switching frequency and a peak-to-peak noise on the output of somewhere between 1-7 VDC depending on the load. Clearly this output voltage was not meant for delicate electronics.
Lithium-ion cells deliver very high energy densities compared to many other battery technologies, but they bring with them a danger of fire or explosion if they are misused. We’re mostly aware of the battery conditioning requirements to ensure cells stay in a safe condition, but how much do we know about the construction of the cells as a factor? [Lumafield] is an industrial imaging company, and to demonstrate their expertise, they’ve subjected a large number of 18650 cells from different brands to a CT scan.
The construction of an 18650 sees the various layers of the cell rolled up in a spiral inside the metal tube that makes up the cell body. The construction of this “jellyroll” is key to the quality of the cell. [Lumafield’s] conclusions go into detail over the various inconsistencies in this spiral, which can result in cell failure. It’s important that the edges of the spiral be straight and that there is no electrode overhang. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they find that cheap no-name cells are poorly constructed and more likely to fail, but it’s also interesting to note that these low-quality cells also have fewer layers in their spiral.
We hope that none of you see more of the inside of a cell in real life than you have to, as they’re best left alone, but this report certainly sheds some light as to what’s going on inside a cell. Of course, even the best cells can still be dangerous without protection.
As is regrettably typical in the cordless tool world, Milwaukee’s M18 batteries are highly proprietary. Consequently, this makes them a welcome target for reverse-engineering of their interfaces and protocols. Most recently the full diagnostic command set for M18 battery packs were reverse-engineered by [ToolScientist] and others, allowing anyone to check useful things like individual cell voltages and a range of statistics without having to crack open the battery case.
These results follow on our previous coverage back in 2023, when the basic interface and poorly checksummed protocol was being explored. At the time basic battery management system (BMS) information could be obtained this way, but now the range of known commands has been massively expanded. This mostly involved just brute-forcing responses from a gaggle of battery pack BMSes.
Interpreting the responses was the next challenge, with responses like cell voltage being deciphered so far, but serial number and the like being harder to determine. As explained in the video below, there are many gotchas that make analyzing these packs significantly harder, such as some reads only working properly if the battery is on a charger, or after an initial read.
This week, Hackaday’s Elliot Williams and Kristina Panos met up over the tubes to bring you the latest news, mystery sound, and of course, a big bunch of hacks from the previous week.
In Hackaday news, get your Supercon 2025 tickets while they’re hot! Also, the One Hertz Challenge ticks on, but time is running out. You have until Tuesday, August 19th to show us what you’ve got, so head over to Hackaday.IO and get started now. Finally, its the end of eternal September as AOL discontinues dial-up service after all these years.
On What’s That Sound, Kristina got sort of close, but this is neither horseshoes nor hand grenades. Can you get it? If so, you could win a limited edition Hackaday Podcast t-shirt!
After that, it’s on to the hacks and such, beginning with a talking robot that uses typewriter tech to move its mouth. We take a look at hacking printed circuit boards to create casing and instrument panels for a PDP-1 replica. Then we explore a fluid simulation business card, witness a caliper shootout, and marvel at one file in six formats. Finally, it’s a telephone twofer as we discuss the non-hack-ability of the average smart phone, and learn about what was arguably the first podcast.
Check out the links below if you want to follow along, and as always, tell us what you think about this episode in the comments!
Download in DRM-free MP3 and savor at your leisure.
The largest European hacker camp this year was in the Netherlands — What Hackers Yearn (WHY) 2025 is the latest in the long-running series of four-yearly events from that country, and 2025 saw a move from the Flevoland site used by SHA2017 and MCH2021, back to just north of Alkmaar in Noord-Holland, where the OHM2013 event took place. WHY has found itself making the news in the Dutch technical media for all the wrong reasons over the last few days, after serious concerns were raised about the fire safety of its badge.
This is the cell supplied with the WHY badge, complete with manufacturer’s warning.
The concerns were raised from the RevSpace hackerspace in Leidschendam, and centre around the design of the battery power traces on the PCB between the battery holders and the power supply circuitry. Because the 18650 cells supplied with that badge lack any protection circuitry, bridging the power traces could be a fire risk.
In short: their report names the cell holders as having tags too large for their pads on the PCB, a too-tight gap between positive and negative battery traces, protected only by soldermask, and the inadequacy of the badge’s short circuit protection. In the event that metal shorted these battery tags, or wore through the soldermask, the batteries would be effectively shorted, and traces or components could get dangerously hot.
The WHY organizers have responded with a printed disclaimer leaflet warning against misuse of the cells, and added a last-minute epoxy coating to the boards to offer additional protection. Some people are 3D-printing cases, which should also help reduce the risk of short-circuiting due to foreign metal objects. Using an external powerbank with short-circuit protection instead of the cells would solve the problem as well. Meanwhile a group of hackers collecting aid for Ukraine are accepting the batteries as donations.
It’s understood that sometimes bugs find their way into any project, and in that an event badge is no exception. In this particular case, the original Dutch badge team resigned en masse at the start of the year following a disagreement with the WHY2025 organizers, so this badge has been a particularly hurried production. Either way, we are fortunate that the issue was spotted, and conference organizers took action before any regrettable incidents occurred.
The short version — don’t buy cheap cells! The cheaper brands were found to have higher levels of manufacturing defects which can lead them to being unsafe. All the nitty-gritty details are available in the report, which can be downloaded for free from Lumafield, as well as the Tested video they did with [Adam] below.
