Presumably someone could PM you as you’re posting this to take presales.
But why misrepresent a safety certification in the first place? If you don’t have it, it shouldn’t be listed on the product image above, period. Your future hopes and intentions make zero difference right now.
And yes, well aware of how UL testing and certification processes work, running through UL1741-SB at the moment. Also well aware of the penalties for fraudulent claims of UL Listing.
So all of your accusations were based on presumptions. Very nice.
Let me be clear with this once and for all, then. We will only treat orders that are made through the website esk8supplies.com and nowhere else. No Paypal, no cash app, no nothing. So unless you have proof of us dealing on other platforms before the necessary paperwork and documentations are available to be presented to the public, find someone else to point your dick towards
Can that not be set in the BMS? I am also looking to do this on the current build so following with keen interest.
Hear lies the issue most BMS don’t but it is a requirement from cell manufacture that it is done. Bms manufactures say the bulk charger should terminate it and the bms just manages the balancing.
Commonly used battery
Commonly used BMS
Sorry only found a 10s best tech bms with a quick Google search so used a Dali one as well as there the 2 most common bms befor we go down smart bms root my point is both don’t have a charge cut off and it’s a requirement of lith-ion in cells.
At this point I think we need some one to desine a PCB to attach to a charge point that can terminate the charge isolate the charge plug when not in use and have a fuse built in. Huge hole in the market as I’m unaware of any product out there that can do this and bms/charges don’t do this part
@Battery_Mooch @DerelictRobot
It can be done but I think very few people will buy it as the issue isn’t seen as a problem to spend money on (to solve) by the community.
IMO, it is.
Many “chargers” are not that at all. They’re just CC-CV power supplies and stay at their rated voltage, continuously charging the pack, until they are disconnected.
Whoa…very inappropriate responses and a very bad sign. Not at all what I would want to see from a new supplier of devices that can be lethal if designed poorly.
Handling lots of interest in, and respect for, what you’re doing is easy. Anyone can do that. What’s important for a company is how the other situations are handled. Gracefully and with patience? Or by striking out immaturely?
@DerelictRobot has a point. You have “UL” listed as a certification but haven’t completed that process. That is wrong. You claim CE but won’t produce the DOC on demand, as required.
I hope you can understand that all this raises red flags, no matter what your confidence level and zeal for the project is.
I’m confused why you’re fighting this so hard. It’s incredibly easy to only list certifications you have (and can prove). Especially in these early phases.
Hmm…actually, why weren’t the certifications just listed as goals? It would reflect the actual situation and no one would have anything negative to say about that this early. And everyone would still see what you’re saying these chargers will have before they are sold.
Total agree with you but it is a very large safety issue and a common for a huge amount of people unaware of not following manufactures advice. more throu been unaware and products not complying to all minimum requirements.
There’s people trying to plug cc-cvs directly into battery termination leads?
For individual round cells I use a charger, most of the time.
But I almost always just use a CC-CV supply for charging packs since I charge lots of different voltage packs. Easier to change settings on a CC-CV supply.
Many of what are called “chargers” are just CC-CV supplies set to a commonly used pack charging voltage. Especially the lower cost ones.
It doesn’t actually matter where/when you’re taking orders. You’re focused on the wrong thing here.
Given that you have made large claims on these forums and failed to back them up, are you honestly surprised folks might have reservations when you are misrepresenting safety testing on your first offering of a product?
You are claiming UL Listing and certifications on your product that you don’t possess. This is the wrong way to approach a product that has the potential to burn your house down.
Rather than get massively defensive, why not correct an obvious misstep? Currently, this isn’t doing things properly.
Yeah it just so happens that sometimes the chargers are much cheaper than an equivalent power supply, so it makes more sense to buy the charger.
I’ve been thinking of getting a power supply for all my, boards for a while but haven’t yet.
At the end of the day, most of us are still going to buy the Aliexpress chargers and still not care about if they faked their UL certification so at the very least it’s a nice thought that this user is attempting to get it officially
Doesn’t make sense to advertise it as having it tho. Make the graphic should say certificate pending or something
FWIW I took the infographic as a preview statement of a product that’s not yet available. Just like the whole thread is kinda a preview looking for feedback.
Well, i think @Stealther got feedback that sharing a preview infographic with as yet unfinished certifications even without a product available can cause concern. but even more so is receiving a free stress test on his communications department.
You spoke out my mind
I agree. Let me just add to this by saying most brands coming out of China isn’t even willing or even fluent enough in English or Technical babble enough to debating on this forum. And through the aggression I’ve received here in the past, whether deserved or not, give me enough reason to presume that some people might just like to poke fun at others who are trying really hard.
I’m not surprised, but knowing this could likely be the case doesn’t justify it. There are different ways to approach things for all of us. If you actually cared enough to read through the posts before yours came along, you can understand that my intentions of postings here before selling the thing anywhere is precisely because the necessary paperwork and documents, very often ignored by most vendors, are not completed properly yet. If I was trying to be a fraud and cheat and trick people, I would’ve just launched the product on reddit or something and print fake certification on the sides of my charger just like other vendor usually would choose to do. Instead, without anyone asking about the legitimacy or ask to see the documents, I have openly expressed the stages that they currently reside in, and stated the steps I will take to get them completed, and further reassured everyone that no sales are to be made, not even pre orders, until there are enough certification documents made ready for public viewing.
As people said, this isn’t my first rodeo receiving criticism here on the forum. I agree that the infographic may be misleading at the moment, and if I release the website for public viewing it could easily be classified as scamming, but that’s just the thing, I don’t see how a preview announcement is a “misstep”. I can assure any claims on materials for the actual vending page is 100% supported and backed up by proofs.
I think it is absurd that people spend time bashing on a product that isn’t even ready for sale, rather than going after products that have been sold, and their issues publicly known, yet the vendor took no action for the mishap. And people wonder why I get upset
But to be honest, if this is the issue that most people have a problem with, then I’m relieved. Because I’ll have the CE certificate done by next week that is owned and signed by our own team. While you guys are at it, are thing anything else you can think of that pisses you off?
Quite the opposite actually, hardworking vendors that come correct get lots of praise here. You dont have to look far to see that.
You personally are suffering from over promising and under execution. In 2 yrs youve promised beefy non vesc esc’s, cheap but good packs and a god tier GaN charger.
What you’ve come with is a 10a cc/cv charger that has no other safety factors over ours that cost 25% the price and weighs 3x due to a BBC worth of silicone. Ain’t no one here want that. Not to mention no certs provided.
Unlike some sports balls, as a vendor, defense is not the best offense. Comming with a desired, well thought out, well documented product is all the offense you need. A pleasant attitude helps too.
Can you understand how this actually necessitates that you do it correctly?
If you are in fact trying to set an example here, I’d suggest you do so by sticking to the standard legal process.
I commend you for bringing a new offering to the market. I also think it’s great that you have intentions of completing safety testing & certification. However, actions speak louder than words
An infographic posted publicly can very easily get reposted elsewhere without your permission, and as it stands your infographic erroneously claims safety certifications you don’t have. If you had simply put: PENDING in bold prior to each certificate listed, we wouldn’t be here having this conversation, though I’m of the belief that a cert shouldn’t be advertised at all until it’s completed.
I wish you the best of luck, but when it comes to people’s safety and a product with the capability of burning down someones home if things go wrong, there’s zero excuse for not being overly cautious and deliberate in your communications. This only serves to reinforce your stated position on safety.
ah you’re forgetting tho!
it’s not 
IP rated
also probably not GaN POWAHH
That you feel our reactions are absurd is worrying.
Firstly, we’re not “bashing on a product”. We’re giving you feedback based on our feelings towards something you posted about here. You would ask us to “be nice”, to phrase things kindly? How does that change anyone’s perceptions of you and your product?
We’re being honest here and you’ve elected to take our feedback very personally. That is the wrong way to move forward with any product development.
If a bunch of people completely trashed a pre-production product post I made then I would thank them and sit down and carefully review the product decisions I had made. Sure, it would hurt to read that but they have done me a big favor by letting me know in advance how they feel. If I had kept everything a secret and released my product as is they, and others, would never be customers.
But with their advance feedback I get to think again about my product features, etc., and I have a chance to change things if I want to. If I decide not to then they have still done me a favor.
Secondly, we have a chance here to “do things right”. To make sure a manufacturer addresses issues of concern to the community. In other words, we’re doing exactly what you say we should be doing!
It’s happening to you because we have a chance of making a difference. The issues with cheap (not just inexpensive) China junk chargers are often known and shared in the community. The manufacturers who are willing to make changes have done so. The others realize they can do whatever they want and never be held accountable. Our numbers are too small to make a dent in their wallets, by boycotting them or some other action, to get them to change things.
So…yea…to help prevent future issues we are giving you our feedback and trying to get a manufacturer to deliver a product that we would consider useful and safe. Surely that’s your goal too, isn’t it?
Manufacturers who post about their product and then get angry when people give them honest feedback and not just gush all over it.
