Chevy Volt Catches Fire After Crash Testing

Volt Battery Redesign Potentially Coming From GM

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has issued a statement on its investigation into aChevrolet Volt fire that occurred at the organization's facilities. NHTSA had done a side-impact test on a Volt then parked it outside, and three weeks later Chevy's plug-in hybrid caught fire. The battery was determined to be the cause, after its coolant line was ruptured during the side-impact test. That led the NHTSA to consider a ruling forcing hybrid and electric-car batteries to be drained after a wreck.

On Friday, NHTSA said it is opening "a formal safety defect investigation" to study the risks of fire in Chevy Volts that have been in major accidents. To be clear, though, the larger story is that this isn't just about the Volt, this is about any vehicle with a battery pack, with NHTSA gathering "additional information about the potential for fire in electric vehicles involved in a crash...."

NHTSA conducted three more tests on the Volt's battery packs over three days, each test involving damaging the pack and rotating the car to simulate an accident and rollover. The battery pack in the third test began to smoke and spark almost immediately, the pack in the second test caught fire a week later. It is due to these results that the formal investigation has been opened. Follow the jump for NHTSA's complete statement.
 
APNewsBreak: GM willing to buy back Volts

December 1, 2011 3:01 PM ET
EW YORK (AP) - General Motors will buy Chevrolet Volts back from any owner who is afraid the electric cars will catch fire, the company's CEO said Thursday.
In an exclusive interview with The Associated Press, CEO Dan Akerson insisted that the cars are safe, but said the company will purchase the Volts because it wants to keep customers happy. Three fires have broken out in Volts after side-impact crash tests done by the federal government.
Akerson said that if necessary, GM will recall the more than 6,000 Volts now on the road in the U.S. and repair them once the company and federal safety regulators figure out what caused the fires.
"If we find that is the solution, we will retrofit every one of them," Akerson said. "We'll make it right."
The fires happened seven days to three weeks after tests performed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. And GM has said there's no threat of fires immediately after crashes. GM also has said that no Volts involved in real-world crashes have caught fire.
Still, NHTSA has opened an investigation into the fires and has asked other companies that make electric cars for battery testing data. NHTSA said the safety testing hasn't raised concerns about electric vehicles other than the Volt.
"The fire broke out seven days later. Not seven minutes. Not seven seconds," Akerson said, adding that the company wants to fix the problem so people continue to have faith in Volts and other advanced technology cars. The company is notified of any Volt crash through its OnStar safety system and dispatches a team with 48 hours to drain the battery, preventing fires, he said.
"I think in the interest of General Motors, the industry, the electrification of the car, it's best to get it right now than when you have — instead of 6,000 — 60,000 or 600,000 cars on the road," he said.
The NHTSA testing, Akerson said, intruded into the Volt's battery pack by four to five inches (10 to 12.5 centimeters), beyond the normal testing standard of about two inches (5 centimeters). Then the cars were rotated 360 degrees to simulate a rollover crash. He said anytime there's a new technology introduced like the Volt, problems will arise. GM is dedicated to fixing them.
He conceded that the fires may cause some potential buyers to shy away from the Volt. But he added that GM is trying to get the message out that they happened only after extreme tests. Akerson also stressed that standard gas engine cars also have problems with fires after crashes.
The Volt can go about 35 miles (56 kilometers) on battery power before a small gasoline generator kicks in to keep the car running. The car can be recharged with a standard home electrical outlet.
The Nissan Leaf, a fully electric car and the Volt's main competitor, has not had any similar fires after crash tests or real-world crashes, Nissan said.
The Leaf battery is cooled by air rather than a liquid used to cool the Volt battery.
Akerson said investigators are looking at spilled coolant as one possible cause of the fires, although he said the coolant itself did not catch fire. Investigators are looking at everything from circuit boards to the way the battery cells are packaged into the Volt's larger T-shaped battery pack, he said.
Earlier this week GM offered loaner cars to all Volt owners until the cause of the fires is found and fixed. So far, Akerson said 16 Volt owners have inquired and only two have taken the loaners.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
 
KennyGS said:
Earlier this week GM offered loaner cars to all Volt owners until the cause of the fires is found and fixed. So far, Akerson said 16 Volt owners have inquired and only two have taken the loaners.
Copyright 2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Click to expand...

Are they offering up an aveo? lol I guess I would take a loaner car once I got into any kind of fender bender.
 
ruh-roh....

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/hot-wired--chevy-volt-cords-prone-to-melting.html

While automakers must abide by dozens of federal regulations for designing cars, plugs used for recharging EVs face no uniform standard.

good to know :pat: I guess once it is proven that an EV burns down a house due to the cord(eventhough they are already melting outlets) then they will start to put regulations on the cords....
 
So does that mean that the Volt does have emission problems?
 
power cord issues
battery case redesign coming
gm willing to buy your volt back or offer any other GM vehicle as a loaner until they make changes
 
thumbnail.aspx
 
General Motors Co. has arranged to buy back Chevrolet Volts from some owners who asked to return the cars amid a federal safety investigation of the car's battery, the company said on Friday.

GM Chief Executive Dan Akerson said around a half dozen owners asked to return their vehicles earlier this week and the company agreed. The auto maker also is working with other Volt owners who asked to return the battery-powered vehicles.

"We are really trying to show that we are a different company," Mr. Akerson said, adding that he and some other executives plan to personally buy the returned Volts for their own use. "We are setting a new standard for customer service."

Mark Reuss, GM's North America chief, said less than a dozen out of around 6,000 owners have asked to return their vehicles at this point.
 
Too bad since this is a great concept... too bad the execution was.. well.. expected, frankly.
 
Did feds delay public disclosure of Chevy Volt fire risk to protect GM sales?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration crashed a Chevrolet Volt back in May, the car's lithium-ion battery burst into flames in June, and the agency acknowledged the fire to the public and launched a safety investigation in late November. Why the six-month time-lapse?

Joan Claybrook, a consumer advocate who ran the NHTSA from 1977 to 1981 has an answer. She told Automotive News the delay was "because of the fragility of [Volt] sales." That's a strong accusation. In six words, she implied that the NHTSA held off on its public report to protect its sister agency General Motors (oh, I'm kidding) from any hit the Volt might take to its already creaky sales. (This past October, before the fire was made public, Jalopnik wondered whether the Volt was a bona fide sales flop.)

Yes, she raises a compelling question. Claybrook is a longtime consumer advocate who once helmed the advocacy group Public Citizen — the one Ralph Nader founded in 1971 — and whose legacy includes working with Nader to get the first major piece of automotive-safety legislation passed. Only trouble is, she offers no proof that the NHTSA's delay was engineered to help GM. Just a plausible scenario.

You may recall that Claybrook also jumped into the last high-profile question of automotive safety. In 2010, she slammed Toyota on ABC's Good Morning America, accusing the company of stonewalling an investigation into cases of unintended acceleration. Again, plausible but no proof. Some have pointed to the NHTSA's odd, politically-charged statement on the Volt fire as evidence the agency cut GM's Volt program six months of slack.

NHTSA continues to believe that electric vehicles have incredible potential to save consumers money at the pump, help protect the environment, create jobs, and strengthen national security by reducing our dependence on oil. In fact, NHTSA testing on electric vehicles to date has not raised safety concerns about vehicles other than the Chevy Volt.​

A controversial stance to some, yes, but no proof of collusion. What we do know is back in May, the NHTSA performed a side-impact crash test on the Volt. The crash damaged the car's battery and ruptured its coolant line. Three weeks later, while parked in an NHTSA facility, the Volt caught fire. A GM spokesman told Automotive News that the company began investigating the fire in June.

GM engineers were unable to replicate the fire until November, when a battery finally caught fire in a GM testing facility after a simulated side-impact test. GM has developed a procedure that will allow towing companies and repair shops to drain the Volt's battery after an accident. Since the fire became public knowledge last month, GM began offering free loaner cars to Volt owners who are worried about the car's safety. Automotive News says 33 people have taken GM up on the offer.

So why did the NHTSA wait so long before going public with the story of the fire and its aftermath? Perhaps it's merely this: Until GM could replicate the problem, which didn't happen until November, the agency had no basis on which to determine its potential impact on safety. Or should the NHTSA have fired off the same half-cocked, knee-jerk response as a "consumer advocate"?
 
some pretty serious allegations
 
Volt Battery Change Expected To Run 9 Million Dollars For GM

Spontaneous combustion concerns weeks after a crash may prompt General Motors to spend about $1,000 per Chevrolet Volt to fix, according to a report from Reuters. The proposed fixes, which would cost a total of $9 million, would likely include reinforcements around vulnerable areas of the car's battery pack, lamination of electric circuitry and better protection for the coolant system to stop leaks.

After a severe crash that causes damage to the Volt's battery pack, coolant can leak out, and if the battery is not discharged, a fire may start. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration discovered the fire danger this past summer when one of its crashed Volts caught fire three weeks after testing. Two more batteries later caught fire when put through simulated crash testing by NHTSA.

Despite the fire risks, both NHTSA and the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety have said they have no plans to change their safety ratings for the Volt. Both organizations gave Chevy's electric car top marks for safety after initial crash testing.

GM has repeatedly said that the Volt is safe to drive and poses no immediate risk of fire after an accident. Yesterday, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood echoed that sentiment. Buyers have been offered loaner cars while the automaker investigates a solution and has vowed to buy back Volts from any owners who no longer want the car due to safety concerns. So far, a "couple dozen" Volt owners have taken GM up on the offer.
 
Chevy Volt To Get Fixed, But Offers No Recall

The Chevrolet Volt is about to get safer. That's the big message from GM today as the company announced structural and cooling system "safety enhancements" that are intended to better distribute the car's energy load from a crash and, thus, better protect the battery from potential fires.

voltstructureenhancement_628.jpg


Mark Reuss, president of GM North America, said that GM is treating this as a voluntary customer satisfaction issue, and therefor it is not a recall. Still, the process to fix the cars does kind of smell like a recall, since all the Volts that have left the factory – roughly 8,000 already sold and another 4,400 at dealerships (every Ampera will need to get this fix as well) – will need to be changed, a process that takes roughly 2-3 hours, Reuss said. He would not hint at what this could cost GM.

Mary Barra, senior vice president of Global Product Development, said the repair parts should be ready and out to dealers in February. In a conference call with reporters, Barra explained the fix this way:
First, we're going to strengthen an existing portion of the vehicle safety structure that protects the battery pack in the event of a severe side collision. ... The current steel tunnel of the car acts as a safety cage surrounding the battery pack. The side pole test impacts the car directly in line with the cross car structure. ... The structural enhancements more evenly distribute the load to further protect the battery and coolant line in the event of a severe side crash. In addition to these structural modifications, we are going to make enhancements to the cooling system. First, we're going to be installing a sensor in the reservoir of the battery cooling system to monitor battery coolant levels. We're also adding a tamper-resistant bracket to the top of the battery coolant resevoir to prevent a potential coolant overfill.​
Barra added that the LG Chem cell chemistry used in the Volt is safe and that, "We still believe liquid cooling is the right option for the Volt."

Since Volt production was shut down for the holidays (as is normal), Reuss said that when it is restarted "very shortly" the safety enhancements will be in place. As for the cars out in the wild, GM dealers can still sell them before the repairs are made because, Reuss said, "the car is safe."

Not everyone is so sure. Reuss said that around 250 Volt owners have requested either a loaner vehicle or apotential buyback, but he said this number may change following today's announcement. As for people who are still shopping, Reuss said, "To our potential customers, if you're in the market, we think you'll be missing an opportunity if you don't consider the Volt."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top