←back to thread

CT scans of 1k lithium-ion batteries show quality risks in inexpensive cells

(www.lumafield.com)
287 points jonbruner | 9 comments | 24 Sep 25 19:29 UTC | HN request time: 0.959s | source | bottom
1. xattt ◴[26 Sep 25 23:14 UTC] No.45392000[source]▶
I went down their rabbit hole, and a conventional tech CT is 10 hours??
replies(2): >>45392146 #>>45397995 #
2. kg ◴[26 Sep 25 23:40 UTC] No.45392146[source]▶
My understanding is that material composition can make a CT scan take a really long time. It makes sense to me that scanning a battery would be pretty slow, given what they're made out of.
replies(1): >>45392378 #
3. xattt ◴[27 Sep 25 00:26 UTC] No.45392378[source]▶
I just assumed it would be impractical due to physical changes of the object from multi-hour exposure to X-ray energy.
replies(2): >>45393541 #>>45398008 #
4. kragen ◴[27 Sep 25 06:14 UTC] No.45393541{3}[source]▶
I don't think ionizing atoms inside a battery will harm it. They don't have DNA.
replies(1): >>45394240 #
5. adwn ◴[27 Sep 25 09:00 UTC] No.45394240{4}[source]▶
I don't know about batteries, but ionizing radiation can definitely permanently damage microelectronics, and those don't have DNA either.
replies(2): >>45396197 #>>45396475 #
6. VectorLock ◴[27 Sep 25 14:51 UTC] No.45396197{5}[source]▶
Thankfully functionality isn't usually necessary to get a successful scan, unlike living targets.
7. kragen ◴[27 Sep 25 15:20 UTC] No.45396475{5}[source]▶
It can, yes, but batteries also don't have microelectronics.
8. habi ◴[27 Sep 25 17:58 UTC] No.45397995[source]▶
That is possible, especially for very high resolution scans and dense materials.

I work with (other) desktop microCT scanners and the longest scan we did took longer than 40 hours.

9. habi ◴[27 Sep 25 17:59 UTC] No.45398008{3}[source]▶
Metal objects don’t change that much due to the radiation.