Asher
Well-Known Member
Someone should just leak it. Or at least someone should publish a partial highly visible list that other certified companies will naturally want to be on.
UL Certified Ebikes
- Thread starter Tobes2718
- Start date
Dewey
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Arlington, Virginia
NBDA's ebike certification database can now be viewed by non-NBDA members at https://nbda.com/connects/ not many entries listing known UL-compliant brands/models so its being mostly ignored at present, presumably once the impact of the NYC UL-certified requirement becomes apparent more brands will update.
Jeremy McCreary
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Carlsbad, CA
Since UL doesn't certify systems, how useful would it be to have just UL-listed batteries and chargers?
In other words, how likely is it for the bike itself to trigger a fire in a battery off its charger?
BlackHand
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Western WA
Actually, the 2849 certification is for the system- including motor, battery, and associated wiring. I'm not sure but I think the charger would be a separate certification. I havent looked at it in a while so I could be wrong on the charger
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
Since whenever it was you asked them this, the list (UL2849 or UL2271 certifications) has been made public. I'll come back with the link after I dig it up.
EDIT: Here it is. On this linked page, click the "NBDA E-Bike Database" link. And hold onto your shorts as what you see when you click that link is going to show a level of suckage that is epic.
Last edited:
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
Also you can go to UL themselves and there is a list available. It too, sucks.
productiq.ulprospector.com
Search for qgns on Product iQ | UL Solutions
productiq.ulprospector.com
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
There is an EU safety seal attesting to the passage of standards, and it is widely faked. There is also a Certificate of Conformity that every ebike is supposed to have - but it is merely an attestation of legal compliance by the manufacturer without anything to back it up. As you go a step up - to what we would call a Class 3 ebike, and our Class 3 is modeled loosely on this kind of bike - there is a thing called Type Approval where everything on the bike has to be certified and checked off, and the manufacturer can then not deviate from those components. Has to do with much more than the drivetrain. Some manufacturers in the EU are trying to get the government to lighten up as the cost for this is extraordinary and is stifling to ebike manufacturing insofar as more realistic commuter bikes are concerned. Last I heard R & M who makes a lot of these over there was on board with that effort, but in typical EU fashion the effort is going nowhere.
leva-eu.com
leva-eu.com
type approval - LEVA-EU
leva-eu.com
Is EU type-approval dangerous for speed-pedelec riders?
Early February, LEVA-EU, together with the project partners of 365SNEL, organized a European symposium on the legal status and market position of the speed-pedelec. In this symposium, attended by the European Commission, several manufacturers testified about the great difficulties they are...
leva-eu.com
Asher
Well-Known Member
Also Europe, from 2019: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...-after-hit-by-third-fire-in-seven-months/amp/
PCeBiker
Well-Known Member
- Region
- Canada
WOW !!
Right in the showroom at the headquarters.
There's no blaming the customers with that.
Fire_Safety
New Member
- Region
- USA
Hi Electric Bike Review community,
My name is Ibrahim Jilani, and I'm the Consumer Technology Director at UL Solutions. I've been at ULS for 18 years and the son of a electric lighting manufacturer who has been ULS certified for over 40 years. I would like to help the community of e-Bike riders, makers, and retailers find better ways to look for UL Solutions Certified e-Bikes, e-Scooters, and light EV batteries.
Generally speaking, there is a public database UL Solutions has to find certified products, it's called UL ProductIQ and accessible at www.ul.com/database.
The way the certified products appear is based on the "Applicant", e.g. the company who has applied to be ULS Certified. If that company chooses to only show their company name as the "Listee", then that is what shows up. If the Applicant chooses to show the bicycle manufacturers who are receiving their electrical system as Listees, then multiple bicycle companies would show up in UL Solutions database.
I encourage all UL Solutions Applicants to include their specific customers that will use their electrical system, so that more of the e-bike brands who use ULS 2849 certified systems will show up in the public database. At the end of the day, it's the Applicant's decision on who shows up as the Listee(s) on the UL Solutions database. For any UL Applicant seeking to add Multiple Listee, here is a quick overview of the process: https://www.ul.com/services/multiple-listing-service-ul-certified-products.
I request this group of enthusiasts to discuss with their e-Bike brands that they would like to see more "Applicants" of ULS Certification to show "Alternate Listee" or "Multiple Listees" on the UL Solutions database. This way the community will have much more transparency on the models that are ULS Certified and associated to the e-Bike brands. Thank you very much for your support and please continue to ride safe, and ride ULS safety certified e-mobility.
Thank you,
Ibrahim Jilani, M.S.
Director, Consumer Technology
UL Solutions
www.ul.com/e-bikes
www.ul.com/e-scooters
www.ul.com/micromobility
My name is Ibrahim Jilani, and I'm the Consumer Technology Director at UL Solutions. I've been at ULS for 18 years and the son of a electric lighting manufacturer who has been ULS certified for over 40 years. I would like to help the community of e-Bike riders, makers, and retailers find better ways to look for UL Solutions Certified e-Bikes, e-Scooters, and light EV batteries.
Generally speaking, there is a public database UL Solutions has to find certified products, it's called UL ProductIQ and accessible at www.ul.com/database.
The way the certified products appear is based on the "Applicant", e.g. the company who has applied to be ULS Certified. If that company chooses to only show their company name as the "Listee", then that is what shows up. If the Applicant chooses to show the bicycle manufacturers who are receiving their electrical system as Listees, then multiple bicycle companies would show up in UL Solutions database.
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed e-Bikes: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=qgns
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed e-Scooters & e-Mobility Devices: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=fkis
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed Light EV Batteries: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=bbca
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Recognized Light EV Batteries: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=bbca2
I encourage all UL Solutions Applicants to include their specific customers that will use their electrical system, so that more of the e-bike brands who use ULS 2849 certified systems will show up in the public database. At the end of the day, it's the Applicant's decision on who shows up as the Listee(s) on the UL Solutions database. For any UL Applicant seeking to add Multiple Listee, here is a quick overview of the process: https://www.ul.com/services/multiple-listing-service-ul-certified-products.
I request this group of enthusiasts to discuss with their e-Bike brands that they would like to see more "Applicants" of ULS Certification to show "Alternate Listee" or "Multiple Listees" on the UL Solutions database. This way the community will have much more transparency on the models that are ULS Certified and associated to the e-Bike brands. Thank you very much for your support and please continue to ride safe, and ride ULS safety certified e-mobility.
Thank you,
Ibrahim Jilani, M.S.
Director, Consumer Technology
UL Solutions
www.ul.com/e-bikes
www.ul.com/e-scooters
www.ul.com/micromobility
Attachments
Last edited:
I'm hoping especially that Mr. Jilani might respond to this.
I have a conversion motor kit from manufacturer AW that is CE-certified but not UL. The external battery and charger that I am using though ARE UL certified.
My question is whether or not this is a fire hazard. As far as I understand, it is the batteries and charges that are the specific worry. But, I live in a building in NYC that is extremely concerned about this and want to prohibit me from using the motor kit.
Additionally, I would never attach this motor to the battery unless I was outside. So, this seems to nearly eliminate any possible fire issue. I hope you'd agree.
Or, do you think that I need to get an entirely new UL certified e-bike?
I've also bought a couple of used LifePo4 batteries from a highly-reputable manufacturer (K2) that seem in nearly new condition. They were used in hospital carts, so I think they needed to meet an even higher safety standard. But, I think used batteries are prohibited in NYC. If you could let me know what you think of this, that would also be helpful.
I have a conversion motor kit from manufacturer AW that is CE-certified but not UL. The external battery and charger that I am using though ARE UL certified.
My question is whether or not this is a fire hazard. As far as I understand, it is the batteries and charges that are the specific worry. But, I live in a building in NYC that is extremely concerned about this and want to prohibit me from using the motor kit.
Additionally, I would never attach this motor to the battery unless I was outside. So, this seems to nearly eliminate any possible fire issue. I hope you'd agree.
Or, do you think that I need to get an entirely new UL certified e-bike?
I've also bought a couple of used LifePo4 batteries from a highly-reputable manufacturer (K2) that seem in nearly new condition. They were used in hospital carts, so I think they needed to meet an even higher safety standard. But, I think used batteries are prohibited in NYC. If you could let me know what you think of this, that would also be helpful.
The battery is the only significant fire concern. If a battery has been designed properly to keep the cells within voltage, current and temperature limits, it shouldn't matter with bike or device you connect it to. The pack should protect itself. UL battery testing should ensure that the protections function reliably. So no need to buy a new bike. UL battery testing also covers mechanical damage to some extent with crush testing and vibration testing.
Having said that, having cells pushed outside their safety limits (voltage, current, temperature again) and mechanical damage is only one way that fires start. Many of the battery failures that I've seen arise are due to cell internal defects and water intrusion. UL 2271 is somewhat weak on both.
Internal cell defects are very difficult to detect so it's understandable that it would be hard to design a certification test to eliminate this problem.
The only defense against a cell going into thermal runaway (TR) is to design a pack to protect against fire propagation. A PPR test shows whether a pack can contain a cell that has gone into TR or if it eventually causes the whole pack to burn. There is no PPR test in UL 2271.
Maybe Ibrahim can correct me, but for ebike batteries that mount to the frame or a rear rack, UL 2271 only requires an IPX3 rating for water/dust ingress, which only covers water drops from certain directions. The recent Specialized battery recall was due to fires caused by water intrusion. UL certification would not have changed this.
Thanks so much for the reply revelpaul. You certainly sound like you know what you're talking about. I still hope to hear from Mr. Jilani, since his position would be a strong argument to present to my coop board. I doubt that I could convince them with your response. I've had a number of similar problems with them on other issues.
Fire_Safety
New Member
- Region
- USA
Hello,
Thank you for your questions. I will try to answer them succinctly.
1. The ebike with an AW motor, is it UL 2849 Certified? If not, it would not meet the recently passed NYC micromobility law. Clause 20 of UL 2849 describes the Motor and Motor Control safety requirements. There are also several test requirements such as Clause 32 Abnormal Operations (includes locked rotor, and motor overload conditions), Clause 38 Vibration, Clause 40 Startup Assistance Mode, Clause 41 Motor Assistance Control that all require motor functions to be evaluated and tested to confirm no fire, explosion, or electric shock hazard as well as other hazards that could cause safety risk.
2. As noted in the NYC micromobility law used batteries are prohibited. From Mayor Adams press releae this past Monday: "Intro. 752 — also sponsored by Councilmember Brewer — will prohibit the assembly or reconditioning of lithium-ion batteries using cells removed from used storage batteries and prohibit the sale of a lithium-ion batteries that use cells removed from used storage batteries." Also, at this time hospital cart battery packs are not required to comply with UL 2271 for light electric vehicle battery packs. They are also not subjected to the abuse conditions an e-bike used on public roadways and inclement weather undergo.
Last edited:
Fire_Safety
New Member
- Region
- USA
That is not true that only the battery pack is the significant fire concern.
The electrical system of an e-bike inclusive of e-motor, safety circuits, battery charger as well as the battery packs pose fire, explosion, and/or electric shock risk. If there was not concern over the full electrical system then industry would not have worked towards a national consensus based safety standard UL 2849. Stakeholders from all parts of the ebike industry took part in its development dating back to 2013.
UL 2849 does have Clause 36 Ingress Protection that requires IPX4 for Water Ingress Protection.
Fire_Safety
New Member
- Region
- USA
For the battery packs certified to UL 2271, the UL Recognition Mark will be the most common mark and will have a file number printed underneath the logo beginning with “MH” and then 5 numbers. In my first post I shared links to the UL Database that can be used to confirm authenticity.
However keep in mind that the e-Bike electrical system certified to UL 2849 is what riders really be looking for. UL Solutions require the UL Mark holographic label to prevent counterfeit of the system. I have shared that certification label in my previous post.
Attachments
Last edited:
Mr. Jilani,
Thank you very much for your authoritative, timely, and thorough answer. I absolutely understand.
I do have a question about your response though. It sounds from this passage that an intact "used" battery is not what's prohibited, but rather the harvesting of the cells. - "will prohibit the assembly or reconditioning of lithium-ion batteries using cells removed from used storage batteries and prohibit the sale of a lithium-ion batteries that use cells removed from used storage batteries."
I wouldn't be removing cells, and they were never removed from the original battery. It is a fully intact battery that had been used. - What you said about the hospital batteries is clearly a separate matter. I thought that they might be even safer, and that's what the manufacturer told me was his feeling. (I bought it elsewhere.) And it's also a LifePo4 battery. - BUT, if I had a used, but otherwise authentic and intact UL-certified battery, would this also be a problem? It does not seem so from my reading of that passage.
Thanks again so much for your reply. If you don't have time to respond to my follow-up question, that is no problem at all.
Jeff
Thank you very much for your authoritative, timely, and thorough answer. I absolutely understand.
I do have a question about your response though. It sounds from this passage that an intact "used" battery is not what's prohibited, but rather the harvesting of the cells. - "will prohibit the assembly or reconditioning of lithium-ion batteries using cells removed from used storage batteries and prohibit the sale of a lithium-ion batteries that use cells removed from used storage batteries."
I wouldn't be removing cells, and they were never removed from the original battery. It is a fully intact battery that had been used. - What you said about the hospital batteries is clearly a separate matter. I thought that they might be even safer, and that's what the manufacturer told me was his feeling. (I bought it elsewhere.) And it's also a LifePo4 battery. - BUT, if I had a used, but otherwise authentic and intact UL-certified battery, would this also be a problem? It does not seem so from my reading of that passage.
Thanks again so much for your reply. If you don't have time to respond to my follow-up question, that is no problem at all.
Jeff
Firstly, I appreciate you posting publicly, and I know you didn't post with the intention of debating the merits of the test or if they are the right solution for the fire issues we are seeing. But, I think it is very important to get it out into the open. and that is what public forums are for.
I just want to clarify that you're saying that ebike motors catching fire or exploding or shocking people are a significant issue? Do you have data that you can share on that?
I agree that chargers, of course, need some kind of certification since they have mains voltage.
I'm not trying to pick on you, but this focus on the rest of the bike distracts us from the real problem that we are trying to solve. That problem is batteries from low quality vendors catching fire in peoples homes. Until I hear about an ebike motor fire burning down a house, I am unconvinced.
Regarding the IPX4 requirement in 2849 clause 36, does this apply to batteries, and therefore over-ride 2271? I still think that is insufficient for safety critical things like batteries, especially for wet climates or people who wash their bike with a spray nozzle on the hose. Also, perhaps the pass/fail criteria should involve inspecting the inside of the battery case for water. The 1 hour observation period after testing doesn't seem to be stringent enough given that most issues due to water ingress happen over a much longer period (so corrosion has time to occur).
Similar threads
