should the brca abandon the electric board homologation list?

[cutting42]

Originally Posted by Cockerill

Yep, it's EB rule 3.2, the exact thing you're happy to lose...

Out of interest, those that wish to see the EB list abolished, is this in it's entirety? Just certain elements of it? If so, which elements? Or just so that you can use your cheap Lipo's that aren't currently on the list?

I looked it up after DCM's post. It is a part of that section currently but there is no reason why it needs to stay that way. The OP question was to lose the list, not the section. I appreciate I am being slightly pedantic

To answer the question, I say lose the need for a specific list. Set the rules generically such as size, format so batteries need to pass physically.

[Cockerill]

Originally Posted by cutting42

Yes so DCM said, I would want to keep that section whilst getting rid of the list.



I am a bit confused what you are getting at here. I only know the off road world so maybe I am missing your point. I don't care what anyone buys really. I use a mix of old and new gear. I am just as fast with any of it, yeah the older batteries can't do two competitive heats in one charge any more but they are fine for one or as a practice pack.

I guess my main issue is there seems little real reason behind having the list. Many other sections don't have it. It does not control costs it just gives a little traceability and it adds a whole lot of admin and confusion.

End of the day, I don't care that much, I will buy decent stuff anyway and it is not a big issue to make sure its on the list but it does seem bureaucratic so I voted Yes!

Currently in off-road battery power isn't a problem... However, let's say races are extended to 8 minutes in 2 years time, and there's no EB list. Your old batteries won't make 8 mins so you go out and buy some new ones, they're much better, you can do a warmup lap, drive carefully and make 8 mins. Two weeks later a new battery comes out, your mate gets one and can drive 110% and just about make 8 mins, you have to have one/two/four, buy some, great! A month later another battery comes out, you can now do 3 warm up laps, drive 110% and last 8 mins. Guess what, time to buy some more batteries

As it is at the minute, manufacturers know new cells have to be homologated, so they all arrive to market about the same time and are the same for 12 months, no battery of the month war. As I said elsewhere, the rules may seem outdated at the moment, but the foundations will ensure a much better market for the consumer should things change. And yes it does control cost, as there's a maximum price limit

[cutting42]

Originally Posted by terry.sc

The Electric Board hasn't been created for 1/10 offroad

snip

For the off road section to stop using the EB lists that are for every section to use is a different question entirely, and the opportunity has just passed.

Hands up guv, I am fairly new to this and come from just the off road world and understand your point.

All my points were from the off road perspective maybe the poll should be rerun as:

"Do off road racers want exemption from the EB Homologation list" which as you say is a different question.

[Cockerill]

Originally Posted by cutting42

I looked it up after DCM's post. It is a part of that section currently but there is no reason why it needs to stay that way. The OP question was to lose the list, not the section. I appreciate I am being slightly pedantic

To answer the question, I say lose the need for a specific list. Set the rules generically such as size, format so batteries need to pass physically.

So before each race every cell has to measured? As it can't be a quick check to see if the part number appears on a 'list' as the list has gone we're already short of scrutineering volunteers, so I'm sure the ones that do won't mind the extra work. And as mentioned above, whilst battery power isn't a limiting factor, if it does become a limiting factor again expect people to push the limits and beyond, as happened with NiMh cells towards the end of their use.

[dazp83]

So the list exists for a theoretical change in the future? Who's making batteries for brca rules as well? Are we centre of lipo market?

[Cockerill]

Originally Posted by dazp83

So the list exists for a theoretical change in the future? Who's making batteries for brca rules as well? Are we centre of lipo market?

I believe the list was created to help protect customers from battery of the month wars when batteries were a limiting factor of the class. These rules and foundations carried over to Lipo because they worked. The change is that Lipo is no longer a limiting factor of off-road racing. Who knows what will happen.

Many many many companies make lipo's for the BRCA rules, as they're the 99% similar to worldwide governing bodies rules, the main differences been in availability rules . As a collective of worldwide governing bodies I'd suggest that yes, they are the centre of the hobby car lipo market.

And yes, UK availability is important. Back in the day when you needed the best batteries, imagine if the ones you needed weren't available in the UK, and importing them was incredibly expensive? That'd be off putting to customers!

[cutting42]

Originally Posted by Cockerill

Currently in off-road battery power isn't a problem... However, let's say races are extended to 8 minutes in 2 years time, and there's no EB list. Your old batteries won't make 8 mins so you go out and buy some new ones, they're much better, you can do a warmup lap, drive carefully and make 8 mins. Two weeks later a new battery comes out, your mate gets one and can drive 110% and just about make 8 mins, you have to have one/two/four, buy some, great! A month later another battery comes out, you can now do 3 warm up laps, drive 110% and last 8 mins. Guess what, time to buy some more batteries

As it is at the minute, manufacturers know new cells have to be homologated, so they all arrive to market about the same time and are the same for 12 months, no battery of the month war. As I said elsewhere, the rules may seem outdated at the moment, but the foundations will ensure a much better market for the consumer should things change. And yes it does control cost, as there's a maximum price limit

Some excellent points but they rely on putting off road into the same performance critical status as on road. It is a bit speculative as even a current shortie at 4500mah could easily do an 8 minute main with room to spare and saddles even more.

Being new (ish) to this I have never experienced a battery (or anything else) of the month war which it sounds like many of you have. I can see a picture in my head of racers hurling batteries across a race track at each other

[cutting42]

Originally Posted by Cockerill

So before each race every cell has to measured? As it can't be a quick check to see if the part number appears on a 'list' as the list has gone we're already short of scrutineering volunteers, so I'm sure the ones that do won't mind the extra work. And as mentioned above, whilst battery power isn't a limiting factor, if it does become a limiting factor again expect people to push the limits and beyond, as happened with NiMh cells towards the end of their use.

You'd just need three std boxes like the buggy box to check they fit, one for each battery format. The list is pretty huge with lots of very similar numbers, I would say dropping a battery in a sized box would be quicker

[Cockerill]

Originally Posted by cutting42

Some excellent points but they rely on putting off road into the same performance critical status as on road. It is a bit speculative as even a current shortie at 4500mah could easily do an 8 minute main with room to spare and saddles even more.

Being new (ish) to this I have never experienced a battery (or anything else) of the month war which it sounds like many of you have. I can see a picture in my head of racers hurling batteries across a race track at each other

When I started my car would dump at 4m30s without fail... Highly frustrating, especially when others could do 2 warmup laps, drive 100% and still have power left.

I admit, the rules may seem outdated at the moment, but the reason for why they're there is solid, and will stop a similar poor situation arising in the future. The rules are there to help the customer based on previous experience.

[Si Coe]

Its worth pointing out that this whole 'different shaped pack' thing is a bit of a myth. It didn't exactly take long to approve shorties - which are unlike the dimensions for sticks and saddle not the same as 6 Sub C NiMH's. Now there are cars out which can only use shorties.
All above board, all approved.
The dimension rules can be changed and are when people want them to be.

As for other points -

Remember we are talking about 1/10th off road here. Thats a class where we presently have more power than we can put down on the track, with miles more duration than we need. The rise of the shorty itself proves that better packaging in the car is actually more important than the roughly 25% drop in capacity.
We don't need cell/motor/chassis of the week to be competitive in this class. It still happens but thats because we are all sheep that flock to buy the new shiny stuff.
Yes this would change if we shifted to a different racing format - but then that is the sort of thing we would need to consider before making such a move. The present 'anyone can have a much power as they can handle and still last a race' thing is one of 1/10th offroads biggest strengths right now and it would be a big risk moving away from that.


In the event of an incident no lawyer is going to care if the cells that caught fire are on the BRCA list or not, because the test procedure is not an officially recognised standard. There are recognised standards for lithium polymer batteries, and as mentioned in the other thread one of the 'tests' for being on the approved list is the presence of paperwork to show they met those standards. Right now that looks like a win for the list, but there are cells not on the list that also have met those standards. A court would see no legal difference between those two, so no the list is not 'safer'. It is an easy way to spot safe cells though.

[PaulUpton]

Has anyone even considered the insurance issue?

We all pay our membership to be covered by the BRCA, if there was no homologated list of LiPos, do you think the insurance company would pay out if someone got hurt but a LiPo fire.....

[Cockerill]

Originally Posted by Si Coe

Its worth pointing out that this whole 'different shaped pack' thing is a bit of a myth. It didn't exactly take long to approve shorties - which are unlike the dimensions for sticks and saddle not the same as 6 Sub C NiMH's. Now there are cars out which can only use shorties.
All above board, all approved.
The dimension rules can be changed and are when people want them to be.

Not a myth at all... Designers would love the opportunity to design around a battery shape they want. They don't, because the rules don't allow it.

The dimensions didn't change to allow shorty's. When released they fit the dimensions laid out by the rules, as there are only maximum dimensions listed. However the approval process did ensure that they were available to all to use instead of just select drivers.

[Si Coe]

So as long as my new pack is smaller than a standard stick its OK?

OK I can only do this once a year due to homologation but its hardly protecting against needing new packs!

Also designers are rather restricted by the size of cells that lipos are made in. If you want a really odd sized cell you'd need it custom made and thats not going to be cheap. So to some extent dimensions are controlled by availability.

[terry.sc]

Originally Posted by PaulUpton

Has anyone even considered the insurance issue?

We all pay our membership to be covered by the BRCA, if there was no homologated list of LiPos, do you think the insurance company would pay out if someone got hurt but a LiPo fire.....

Yes, it was considered right at the start of the other thread.

Once again this is covered in your BRCA handbook in the section titled, not surprisingly, "Insurance and the RC Racer".

[MattW]

Someone humour me for a second. Wasn't there a proposal at the off road agm, held less than 2 weeks ago?? That was withdrawn or defeated??

[DCM]

Originally Posted by MattW

Someone humour me for a second. Wasn't there a proposal at the off road agm, held less than 2 weeks ago?? That was withdrawn or defeated??

Internet news tells me it was withdrawn by the proposer, but the proposal was to drop the list for regionals not in it's entirity.

Tom is correct, back in the day, the list protected people from maybe 2 battery advances, maybe 3 in a year, 1700SCR's. then SCRC's then SCRC-SP's. but when SP's were on there, the urban myths about batteries with certain batch numbers were better than others were better..... I do think that now, off-road at least, the only advantage gained is by smaller cells allowing for better weight distribution.....

So, how did the shorty get cleared, simple, the stick packs dimensions are a mximum dimension.... the confusion comes that ROAR rules stipulate that a 4wd car must either hold a full size stick pack or saddle pack....

The list don't make a battery safer, give you insurance cover etc, especially at club.

[MattW]

Yes, I'd only seen it on internet news........

But it appears it went something like this (someone feel free to correct me if I get this section wrong). Someone thinks it's a good idea for regional's not to use the list, and proposes it (good man - he understands how this works). Then he goes to the AGM to present it and vote for it. While at the AGM, he decides it wasn't such a good idea after all, so withdraws it. Why he does this, we don't know unless you were there - I wasn't! Maybe it was discussed, and he started to understand why having a list is a good idea (this is why online voting won't work btw). So now what's happened - it seems that there are other people who thought the proposer was on to something. However, they didn't read the proposals / decided not to go to the AGM to support it and are generally a bit miffed about it all.

Personally, I fully understand the origins of the EB list, I was at the AGM at the Chesterfield hotel where the off road section elected to be a part of the EB and use their lists. I also remember a couple of years ago where having the list initially prevented saddle pack lipo's from being used as they didn't actually fit many cars - so the list prevented a situation where by some people were able to run lipo and some weren't. It forced the battery manufactures to produce cells that would actually fit into cars designed for saddle packs. Seems like a good thing to me.

[dwp102]

Originally Posted by Cockerill

Yep, it's EB rule 3.2, the exact thing you're happy to lose...

Out of interest, those that wish to see the EB list abolished, is this in it's entirety? Just certain elements of it? If so, which elements? Or just so that you can use your cheap Lipo's that aren't currently on the list?

Use cheap lipos (that are peer reviewed and tested - and are known to be safe) that currently aren't on the list. It's management of the cells that is the problem not the cells themselves. I personally have swollen several sets because I have not worked out how to manage them correctly. Ideally you need 3 or 4 sets to ensure they are cold before recharging. If you want to run non stop . That is 300 quid or 80 quid depending on your perspective. And if you puff a few sets up you could be easily spending 400 on batteries. Unnecessary.

[DaveG28]

Originally Posted by dwp102

Use cheap lipos (that are peer reviewed and tested - and are known to be safe) that currently aren't on the list. It's management of the cells that is the problem not the cells themselves. I personally have swollen several sets because I have not worked out how to manage them correctly. Ideally you need 3 or 4 sets to ensure they are cold before recharging. If you want to run non stop . That is 300 quid or 80 quid depending on your perspective. And if you puff a few sets up you could be easily spending 400 on batteries. Unnecessary.

How do you know they are peer reviewed? Do you have to take print outs of forum posts by x people to the regional to show your lipo is peer reviewers and not a home made accident waiting to happen?

Then there's the sizes, you could have 3 boxes yeah, or you could, I guess, have a list?

Oh wait we do.

In reality is the complaint here not simply that no one likes the requirement regarding a number of UK stockings at retail? That's what's stopping the lipo's everyone wants off the list right?

[Origineelreclamebord]

Originally Posted by cutting42

I vote yes but would not want a free for all. Suggest setting a series of size and construction limits to avoid custom sizes and cars built for weird and wonderful layouts.

Stick, Saddle, Shortie and Square hard case covers it for now. Can always add more if new sizes come out and are adopted just as square and shortie have been.

+1: Sizes of components should be standardized (2S, certain sizes, 540 motor, etc) and the electronics should be suitable for the racing environment (things like a hard case and protection around as many as possible rotating and hot parts) - leave the rest to the companies and consumers to sort out.

Also, instead of a homologation list, you could apply a rule that if scrutineers don't trust the safety of your electronics, they are not approved to ensure everyone's safety. Sure this requires some guidelines so you can confidently travel to an event with only the set of electronics that's in your car, but consider this: Homologated electronics don't guarantee safety if they're not used well, and have some faith in it that the manufacturer doesn't want a reputation of injuring a high percentage of its users... so why use a homologation as your benchmark for safety? Fellow hobbyists working as scrutineers will be more than able to judge whether or not they would feel comfortable with a certain car near them in the pit area or when marshalling

As you might have noticed, I don't live in the UK... Where I live, the most used electronics are HobbyKing/Turnigy products. I don't consider scrutineers to be very critical about things, yet in my 3 years of racing I have seen only one LiPo fire because someone accidentally charged his battery pack at 3S - homologation wouldn't have prevented that, instead he would've just burnt away a more expensive battery Anyway, he noticed the case cracked during charging and he had time to carry it away from the pit area, where it had all the space to sizzle and smoke as hard as it could. Also I've seen 2 or 3 ESCs go up in smoke, but I've never witnessed a car burn down, a motor disintegrate or someone get injured from bad electronics.

So sure these electronics pack a punch, but in my eyes homologation will not prevent the few accidents that do happen. Just think about everyone's safety when working on your own electronics, watch each others' electronics and make sure there's a bucket of sand in the area to smother a LiPo fire!