←back to thread

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

(www.lumafield.com)
287 points jonbruner | 1 comments | 24 Sep 25 19:29 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
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 #
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 #
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 #
kragen ◴[27 Sep 25 06:14 UTC] No.45393541[source]▶
I don't think ionizing atoms inside a battery will harm it. They don't have DNA.
replies(1): >>45394240 #
adwn ◴[27 Sep 25 09:00 UTC] No.45394240{3}[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 #
1. VectorLock ◴[27 Sep 25 14:51 UTC] No.45396197{4}[source]▶
Thankfully functionality isn't usually necessary to get a successful scan, unlike living targets.