Hello Bella,
How is the new design for the battery carriers going? Can you please tell us more about it?
Thank you.
Hello Everyone !
Sorry to let you waiting !
Our engineers have been making more tests. And we have asked the 3rd part to make test. There is updated result will be published in next a few days.
Pls keep patient !
Best regards
Bella
Hello Bella,
Thank you for the update. Please answer the following 3 questions:
- Can you please tell us which IC’s the new carrier is using?
- Is there one IC for each cell or one IC for all the cells?
- Can you please send me the revised X60 and K50 carriers so I can test and publish the results here?
Thank you.
Can I keep the old battery holder from my X40 after you send me new one, can i please 
I just like how it is built 
Thanks for the update. 
~Our solution is using LINEAR IC LTC4054 instead of previous IC TP4055, first,the test results are looking good.
~Every battery is charged and monitored by a single IC.
~ Again, pls CANCEL this GB sales.
if customers have any questions, pls send me e-mail. bella@acebeam.com
Thanks !
~The 3rd party is doing the test for us. We won’t send you any samples at the moment.
Again, let’s keep patient and wait for the testing result of the 3rd party !
Good development! 
Nice of you to drop by here with us every now and then, so we won’t miss you so much, Bella!
Hello Bella,
I again thank you for your timely reply.
So with the replacement cell carriers, each cell will still have its own IC, (same as before) but with a LTC4054 IC. With the same ±1% tolerance spec of the new LTC4054, each chip still appears to have the potential of having the same various termination voltages problems, just as the TP4055 did. This is of huge concern.
As I had already attempted in trying to assist Acebeam with a simple solution, I must again ask the same questions as before:
- What steps are being taken to assure that each cell will share the same termination voltage during recharging?
- Is Acebeam testing each LTC4054 and grouping the chips by termination voltage prior to assembling the carrier?
- Will each carrier be tested to assure that each cell terminates at the same voltage prior to shipping them to us?
I already closed the X60 group buy several months ago due to the QC problems discovered in 2 of the 3 X60 flashlights you sent me. It has continued to remained closed due to the unresolved cell carrier charging issues that you tired to ignore during your false attempts to convince me that there was no issue. So of course this GB is closed. I have already notified several people long ago to that effect. Where you under the false impression that this GB was still open, even though no flashlights have been sold for several months? What about the dozens of communications we shared in this regard… did you forget those too? Its very strange of you to keep bugging me and the admin about this, isnt it?
Also, the threads and posts will remain as a permanent reminder that attempting to disregard human safety in the selfish interests of selling dangerous products for profit will not be tolerated by your customers… and thats putting it very nicely given the history.
I am pleased that I have been successful (so far) in convincing several of your disappointed/angry customers to hold off on having the sale of your products banned in several countries for the safety issues you initially attempted to ignore. We are more than happy to continue to wait a bit longer (as you had suggested) but only as long as: you continue to give us periodic updates, the new carrier is provided and delivered in a timely fashion, the carrier works as intended AND you do not ignore my communications and concerns any longer when I ask you. Bella, I shouldnt have to keep bugging you to reply to this thread. From a CS perspective, Im sure you know its the right thing to do. We are obviously not going to go away until this has been resolved to our satisfaction.
It was also mentioned to me by more than one person that if your company wishes to continue selling flashlights, you dont have much of a choice. Its very disappointing that Acebeam chose to take it this far and only address the situation AFTER its users proved the product to be faulty and was threatened to have the sale of its products banned. Please advise your management that they might consider this fiasco as a free valuable lesson in business ethics and moral responsibility to its customers. You are all most welcome in advance, and we are more than pleased to have helped provided such invaluable leadership during Acebeams moral dilemma.
And as always, I welcome your comments here for all to read. AGAIN, DO NOT CONTACT ME VIA PM or EMAIL. Communicate with me here ONLY so EVERYONE can read your replys. If necessary, I am prepared to copy/paste our prior conversations for everyone to read. Then a ban will not be necessary (regardless of the outcome) since no one will every buy your products again. I dont think either of us want it to go that far, so I will leave it at that. After all, we like Acebeam and will hopefully want to buy more flashlights after the problems have properly been resolved. :bigsmile: We would also guess that Acebeam shares our views in that regard.
On behalf or everyone, we thank you for helping us. Let us try to maintain this level of communication and understanding in the future.
I again look forward to your timely reply and hope you are still smiling.
Is it just me or can this sentence be read two different ways?
“~Every battery is charged and monitored by a single IC.”
- Every (as in all batteries are) charged and monitored by a single IC.
- Every (as in each) battery is charged and monitored by a single IC.
Could this be a semantic question that will help to have clarified?
You bring up an interesting point. I took it to mean that each cell has its own IC. Bella, can you please clarify and also answer my questions in the prior post?
Exactly my thoughts too. Very ambiguous.
It’s been a long wait for this fix and it’s overdue for a resolution.
Acebeam has nothing to hide to BLF members and our valued customers, dealings from our side we’re always sincere and honest,
If members would like this we can also provide our messages, as we said we have nothing to hide.
We are sorry that this all lead to threatening and accusations towards our company and discrediting of our reputation.
Acebeam is Responsible Company and we are listening to all our customers, all recommendations as well as complaints.
Our engineers are working very hard, even at this very moment, to solve every issue concerning battery-carrier as well as
to make our products even better and raise their quality even higher.
We can only ask all our customers to trust us and be patient for a little bit more, solution is close once the 3rd party finish testing. We must perform thorough testing to be sure we have a permanent solution.
Here is my last post in this thread. Please wait for our new thread of an important announcement about the result of the new battery carrier tests.
I’m optimistic a solution is being developed and I’m grateful to Acebeam for their efforts.
It’s just unfortunate that so much prompting was required to achieve this result.
In their favor I should mention that they’ve replaced another of my Acebeam flashlights without question.
It seems to me they are making a significant effort to maintain their reputation.
Looking forward to the new and functional carriers.
Another week has passed and it’s again time to prompt for an update regarding replacement cell carriers.
Every time I visit here, I get frustrated. I want to understand the concerns here. I'm not saying they are not valid concerns, but I want to understand and hopefully learn the basis for the concerns. I don't need a strong reply saying how bad the light is. I need to understand and be able to recognize the alleged dangers. I'm guessing there have to be others wondering too, in silence. Why, for example, are:
- the cells that are at a slightly lower voltage are getting "beat up" by the other cells? How is this so? Say you have 4S cells. How does any one cell knows the other 3S are not contributing exactly the same voltage each and beating it up? Doesn't it have about 12 volts from the other cells flowing through it? This doesn't beat it up, but if every cell providing the 12 volts are not equal to it, it is getting beat up? I can't wrap my head around that.
- cells coming out of the light not exactly the same voltage bad? I've seen this happen in healthy laptop packs. Yes, in my early days I pulled apart some pretty young packs. In my mind, the important thing is that the pack shuts down before one of the banks is depleted. How are you determining that one bank is depleted and the pack should be shut down but isn't?
- does each cell need a protection chip? Laptops don't protect each single cell in a bank. Just the overall individual banks are protected in the numerous packs I have dismantled. Are you proposing that the protection should be at the individual cell level? The questions in the above posts seem to indicate that.
I apologize if these are naive questions, but this is the only thread that raises them that I am aware of. I use lithium cells in series in most of my lights. Answering the questions well help me and and maybe others be safer users of of lithium cells. Also, better distributors of safe practices to others.
Agreed 100%. were all waiting, and waiting…
in my case it’s charging till the green light comes on but one or two cells are being charged to the point of getting very hot, the other four are receiving no charge
The problem then is I was using the torch with 2 cells at 4.20 volts plus and 4 cells at 3.52 volts not good
To be honest the first time I charged the cells in the torch, I trusted the charging system and didn’t check the voltages and just used the torch, it was only the fact it had such a short run time that made me check it all the next time I used it.
Now before I used the in torch charging system, the first few times I used the torch I charged the cells in my bt3100, it was only when I charged the cells in the torch for the first time and had reduced run times that I decided to investigate why.
Now the problem is, what if I or someone else had only ever used the in torch charging system, they would not have anything to compare with and would just think the short run time is normal, it is a high powered torch after all, and would continue happily using the torch not realising that two cells were getting full charge but four cells were staying flat
One it’s not good for the cells, but two it’s well documented on here what could happen if you mix fully charged cells in with completely flat cells in series inside a metal tube
^ That certainly is bad and the manufacturer should correct that. Same with some of the other problems others have encountered.
I just don't understand why the things I mentioned in the bullets above are dangerous on their own. They don't sound unusual to me. Obviously, they beg the question as to the safety of the light and the safety should be researched.
The protection chip on each cell was implemented by Acebeam. However, given the manufacturing tolerance of the chips, they aren’t being charged properly. Some being overcharged and some being undercharged. Why is this an issue you may ask. For the same reason that it is advised to match cells in a light for voltage and resistance.
There is also the issue of cells being discharged unevenly.
The main safety implication for consumers is that the cells could reverse charge and have a “venting with flame” episode. The problem with that in a sealed pipe is that it can explode catastrophically as the immense pressure has no where to go. The pressure builds so quickly.
Do a quick Google search for visual results of what can happen. This is why the issue has been pushed as it is a safety issue.
That is my take on it.
Have people noticed significant issues in uneven discharge? I never use in light charging, but have been kind of lazy about checking voltage after use as of late.