I saw a Note7 with it's back off the other day, revealing the battery. The first thing that caught my eye was how disproportionately thin (width vs height) the battery was. I'm probably 100% wrong, but for some reason the idea of heat being "wicked" up the battery instead of dispersed throughout immediately came to mind. What's your thoughts? (Having owned several Samsung products when batteries were still replaceable, I've seen the battery go from a small square-ish design to increasingly elongated design.)
You might be right, but most phones are pretty thin nowadays, so I would expect to see more battery problems in all the other thin phones.
I would guess it also depends on how hot the phone itself is running. If Samsung clocks these phones too high it could be a contributing factor. But yes, if thinness itself was the only contributing factor you'd expect to see explosions left and right. Personally I feel the phones have gotten too thin. The main reason for a case on my Nexus 6P is just to add some thickness and ensure a comfortable hold. Sent from my SM-T320 using Tapatalk
One would think that the larger the surface area, the more quickly heat would dissipate from the battery toward the back case, instead of building up inside the battery interior. So the thinner the better, given that battery capacity is based on volume. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Working construction, I can't tell you how many times I've see people sticking their new smartphone in their pocket, like they did with their flip phones, only to find a broken screen later in the day.
So you're thinking that a narrow battery will dissipate heat more efficiently because it has bigger surface for the same volume, right? Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Not narrower, but thinner. I'm saying that I believe there is nothing to the 'wicking theory' here. These batteries are roughly 5" long by 2"wide and 0.2" thick. Heat will dissipate to bring the battery and surrounding parts (case) to equilibrium, in the fastest manner. Having the cooler back case in maximum contact with the largest surface area would reduce retention of high temperatures in the batteries interior. So a thinner battery would be better regardless of it length to width ratio. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Maybe I just misread the @KevinJames post, I just thought he misspoke and meant narrow when he said width vs height. In which case I'm sorry for carrying it on
He may have, and it was a confusing question in that regard. When I think of a object such as the battery, I wouldn't equate thinness with a width dimension. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Hmm. I would never have thought width verses height could be misunderstood. Per the linked image of a phone, I guess "length" would have been a better descriptor. I apologize for confusing you all. http://www.storyleather.com/media/helloslide/length-width-depth.jpg In my mind I was envisioning holding the phone parallel to my face for viewing, which would make both the phone and its battery measured by height.
@KevinJames. You observed and wrote how 'disproportionately thin' today's batteries were. I was thinking of thinly sliced bread. I cannot imaging asking for a low depth slice of bread nor piece of cake. LOL Anyhow my opinion is that how narrow the battery is not important unless it was a very thick battery because that dimension grew to maintain the battery 's volume. A battery 's energy density is fixed, so the battery's volume determines it wattage capacity. So the more surface area exposed to the rear case will keep the battery cooler. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When I read the first post, I was visualizing something like an USB stick, specially as KJ mentioned width vs height. I figured when he said "thin", he meant narrow. The wicking effect actually made some sense to me since that wouldn't have a large surface area to dissipate the heat. Reading the subsequent posts, I decided I was making the wrong assumption and that it was more shaped like rectangular disk and in which case the wicking effect would not apply since the surface area would still be ample. Of course now I am totally confused, it seems like you really meant thin as in narrow, right KJ? Can someone please "unconfuse" me Which of the two following shapes. ?
Here's the image I saw, which led to my musings http://www.chipworks.com/sites/defa...hinsights-samsung-galaxy-note-7-batteries.jpg
Here is the iPhone 6 Plus battery. They all seem to be narrow these days, and thin too. Wait a minute! This iPhone 6 Plus battery seems huge compared to the Note 7 battery. Hmmmm Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Using iFixit teardown pictures I estimate the Note 7 battery to be about 4x1.5", while 6+ battery is 4.7x1.9". No wonder it seems huge and the Sammy one must be a heck of a lot denser to supply the extra juice.
So if the Note 7 is 3500 mAH and the iPhone 6Plus is 2750...and the Note battery is physically smaller. That would link to the story in the other thread as a 'possible' safety issue. Can you estimate an Edge battery too? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That quite a bit larger for a 3600 mAh battery. Only 100 more than the Note 7 Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Lends credence to the theory that the super-high density of the Note 7 batteries could be a factor. Wicking I don't know.
Making an assumption, probably not true, that all three batteries are the same thickness. Here is a plot of the battery area ( implying volume) vs mAH. I'm using the size estimates from @dmapr The Note 7 seems to be an outlying low data point on a straight line from the iPhone to the Edge. And link to other thread More VERY BAD news for Samsung Note 7's https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...&share_tid=84939&share_fid=17383&share_type=t Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
