Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Cellphones Government Power Communications United States Hardware

CPSC: Stop Using The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 ( 42

The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 can not seem to catch a break. In addition to the recall issued by Samsung over faulty batteries that have the potential to burst into flames, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is urging Galaxy Note 7 users to avoid turning on or charging the devices while flying on planes. Most recently, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued a statement "urging all consumers who own a Samsung Galaxy Note 7 to power them down and stop charging or using the device." TechCrunch reports: "The government body is 'working quickly to determine whether a replacement Galaxy Note 7 is an acceptable remedy for Samsung or their phone carriers to provide to customers.' In other words, they may still decide that the problem is of a scale sufficient to issue a complete product recall. This could be the case should the problem causing the fire prove to be in the phone itself as well as the battery. The CPSC and Samsung are working together on a more official notice with advice on what to do (other than turn it off), so until then, stay safe."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CPSC: Stop Using The Samsung Galaxy Note 7

Comments Filter:
  • and never start
  • by ArtemaOne ( 1300025 ) on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:07PM (#52859553)
    I can hardly wait to dongle the dongle.
    • by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:27PM (#52859715)

      Some phones bend in your pocket, other kill you in your sleep or bring down a 747 when they catch fire. Seems sort of all the same to me.

      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        Well, at least those phones were cheaper to make without user replaceable batteries. I'll bet there are a whole bunch of end users laughing at Samsungs misery, those users who demand end user replaceable batteries (just think, instead of a recall, they simply could have sent each user a new battery, a cost to Samsung of something like $20 a phone instead, youch, new phones returned, rebuilt, sold as refurbished phones in the second hand market, something like $400 lost per phone). So if the note & phone

  • Yeah but, (Score:4, Funny)

    by Silver Surfer 1 ( 193024 ) on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:09PM (#52859579)

    At least it has a headphone jack! ;)

  • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) * on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:17PM (#52859639)
    Right here next to my Hoverboard...
  • by Bruce Perens ( 3872 ) <> on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:21PM (#52859673) Homepage Journal

    One in 42,000 phones is estimated to have the problem by Samsung. Now, this is the problem with high energy density. If there's a problem, you get a release of high energy all at once.

    Now, the whole world is moving toward better batteries. Meaning denser, and even more likely to fail catastrophically unless the makers can somehow contrive a chemistry with higher internal resistance (and thus harder to charge and less efficient). Otherwise, more efficient batteries are all going to make pretty good bombs.

    • Come on Bruce, you are better than that...

      Its almost as if they should do something about it. Perhaps some kind of recall?
      Oh look! they must have been listening.. Sure, they haven't quite got it sorted out yet - I would imagine it takes a bit of time to get
      guaranteed good new phones flowing in the pipeline..

      I assume you are recommending the same thing for Sony and HP laptops?
      I mean, its not even Sony

      • Well, you're assuming that I don't already know about batteries. Which is wrong. And hey, a bit arrogant.

        I am not talking about today's cells, which is why this is the tip of the iceberg. The market is pushing for new chemistry like lithium-air, and improvements in current chemistry like increasing the surface area of the electrodes without increasing their size, using nano texturing such as nanowires. All of these technologies are speculative and might not be productized, but we're going to end up with mor

    • Solid state batteries should be better at limiting fault current without the efficiency penalty.

      There are so many things that will kill us all, might as well go surfing with sharks.

      (I expect better of you too, Bruce.)

      • I'm at all not clear why you expect better of me. Do you think that future, denser battery tech is going to be less troublesome? Lithium-air can potentially store as much energy as gasoline.

        I'm not saying we should stop it. We need to figure out how to live with it. Tesla did a lot of work to encapsulate their batteries, for example.

        Are you sure about solid-state batteries? My impression was that the kind of resistance they have limits self-discharge, not normal charging and discharge.

        • What (little) I hear on solid-state is for stationary applications, and some of the things being floated (heh) sounds very promising. The systems I am seeing are designed for opportunistic charging for renewables. Price point isn't there by a long shot yet though.

    • by hey! ( 33014 )

      I remember when Li-Ion technology was new -- as in not available to the general public at all. I was an MIT student (back when Disco sucking was a hot cultural issue) and there were a few labs around campus that had them, but they were considered extremely hazardous. It wasn't the electrochemical energy density that made them dangerous (although that's what made them attractive); it's that lithium cobalt oxide is a chemically dangerous electrode material. It's subject to thermal runaway and when heated rel

      • Not only do the plates release O2, the electrolyte is an organic solvent. One choice is dimethyl carbonate.
      • by bmo ( 77928 )

        In Casa BMO, we have gone through *two* S6s. The first one died and I was horrified by the amount of heat it was generating as it was dying. It really was frightening. And since the battery wasn't removable, it's not like you could yank the fucker out and let it burn in your driveway. So it sat in a Corelle bowl while we *watched* it die completely and cool off.

        This problem did not start with the 7.

        Our second S6 (warranty replacement) died the blue-light-of-death and simply wouldn't charge anymore.

        We ha

    • Meaning denser, and even more likely to fail catastrophically unless the makers can somehow contrive a chemistry with higher internal resistance (and thus harder to charge and less efficient).

      You don't begin to understand what a high internal resistance means for a battery.
      • You don't begin to understand what a high internal resistance means for a battery.

        Sigh. If you're going to say something like that, at least try to substantiate yourself. The thing that I am talking about is ionic resistance and interfacial resistance, rather than the structural impedance of the battery which provides the internal load that results in self-discharge.

        The safest high-density battery would have ionic or interfacial resistance that increases with heat or current, limiting its instantaneous outp

        • by lgw ( 121541 )

          An approach that inherently heat-limits charging (rather than discharge) would seem to be the issue at hand. And I'd love to see it.

          I'd also love to see something better for home energy storage, where energy density is less of an issue, and safety more important still. Though I guess if you're looking at applications competing with propane tanks, you just need to beat that, but something safe to stick in the wall of the house would be better - I'm certainly dubious about the Tesla battery given how comple

          • Once it is in thermal runaway, discharging is what keps it there. Also consider mechanical damage like a car crash.
          • They certainly have problems, but my dad has been living with lead acid batteries for his solar array, as lithium was too expensive at the time. The batteries will need replaced soon, but lead acid still looks like the way to go. The memory affect sucks, and power density is horrible, but they are pretty darn safe. I wouldn't want to short the system, but if you dropped a wrench on the output terminals it wouldn't be nearly as serious as doing the same on a lithium system, provided the protection circuitry
  • by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Friday September 09, 2016 @08:43PM (#52859805)

    My Galaxy Note 7 works just fine. I'm using it while it's charging but it's still not bursting into flam#OP*qe! B89*#()*13!B89*#()*13!B89*#()*13!


    • by shanen ( 462549 )

      I'd give you a funny mod if I ever got a point. However, my favorite joke of that type is still:

      Yip yip yip yip yip yip yip


  • ....if only it had user replaceable battery... ah.
  • I don't think it's just a matter of being here too early. I'll try to remember to come back later, but right now there are no "funny" and no "insightful" posts. Obviously an easy target for both cases. Well, maybe not so much for the insight side, though it saddens me that such greedy incompetence may well destroy Samsung as in now.

    I really have trouble understanding how someone can screw up the technology of basic physics. There must be a missing or defective temperature sensor involved here, but this is a

  • by dohzer ( 867770 )

    Yawn. Another article?!
    Move along. Nothing to see here.

  • There have not been enough incidents to justify this kind of panic-reaction. There is already a recall underway. Hence I think this additional things are not about consumer safety, but about propaganda. They probably want to drive home a "do not buy Samsung". It may also be plain stupidity, it gets really hard to separate that from politics these days.

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford