https://www.lumafield.com/first-article/posts/whats-hiding-inside-haribos-power-bank-and-headphones

[6893b4b327][6893b15575]
[6893b4b327]
 
[6896795026]
Search
Menu
Design to RealityDesign to Reality[placeholde]
The Quality GapThe Quality Gap[placeholde]
Go/No-GoGo/No-Go[689d0f8107]
Materials WorldMaterials World[placeholde]
Scan of the MonthScan of the Month[placeholde]
From The FloorFrom The Floor[placeholde]
Recall RoundupRecall Roundup[placeholde]
 
About
 
Events
 
Visit Lumafield /
[6893b15575]
EventsAboutVisit Lumafield /[6893b4b327]
Friday, June 27, 2025
52degF in san francisco, CA
[6893b4b327]
Menu
[689b7f40b9]
About First Article
Events
Design to RealityDesign to Reality[placeholde]
The Quality GapThe Quality Gap[placeholde]
Go/No-GoGo/No-Go[689d0f8107]
Materials WorldMaterials World[placeholde]
Scan of the MonthScan of the Month[placeholde]
From The FloorFrom The Floor[placeholde]
Recall RoundupRecall Roundup[placeholde]
 
[6896795026]
Search
[6893b4b327]
Design to RealityDesign to Reality[placeholde]
The Quality GapThe Quality Gap[placeholde]
Go/No-GoGo/No-Go[689d0f8107]
Materials WorldMaterials World[placeholde]
Scan of the MonthScan of the Month[placeholde]
From The FloorFrom The Floor[placeholde]
Recall RoundupRecall Roundup[placeholde]
[                    ]
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
 
From The Floor
A Brief History of Civilian Drones
 
The Quality Gap
Behind the Battery Report
Behind the Battery Report Today, we released Lumafield's Battery
Quality Report, an investigation into the hazards that hide inside
the lithium-ion battery supply chain. For this study, I CT-scanned
1,054 cylindrical 18650 cells from ten different brands, spanning the
gamut from reputable, well-known battery manufacturers to
ultra-discounted cells from Temu and several sources in-between. As
battery users, we all intuitively expect alternative-brand cells to
be lower quality, but it's easy to gloss over how much worse they may
really be, especially when a cheaper look-alike promises the same or
better specs, and the name brands feel overpriced. However, our CT
scans revealed much bigger quality gaps than I could've imagined, and
once we factored in how dangerous a bad battery can be, the story
turned from curious to genuinely concerning. Diving into battery
quality questions As a Technical Product Marketing Manager at
Lumafield, I design experiments to test and show how engineers can
leverage CT to solve real problems. I'm constantly looking for areas
to double-click on, and as a gadget-lover, batteries are
all-too-often on my mind. A few months ago, I wrote a blog post about
the Anker A1263 power bank recall, and it achieved a surprising level
of virality given the relatively unglamorous product it covered. But
perhaps the practical pervasiveness of batteries in all of our daily
lives is exactly what drove so much interest in the piece. In that
article, I scanned five power banks: enough to make a few concrete
observations, but a tiny sample against the realities of production
scale. I wanted the insights that could come with a larger dataset,
and 18650 cells seemed like the obvious choice. 18650s are
standardized battery cells, their name reflecting that they measure
18 mm in diameter and 65 mm long. These cells are absolutely
everywhere. Over five billion are produced each year, and they can be
found in everything from electric toothbrushes and cordless drills to
even some electric vehicles. For example, each of the Anker power
banks I scanned contained 3 18650s, and my colleague's e-bike battery
contained a whopping 39. Though the majority of 18650s are assembled
into packs of multiple cells and deeply integrated into devices,
there are a few applications where the cells are user-replaceable,
such as vapes or flashlights, making them relatively easy to procure.
Study methodology I ordered at least 100 cells from each of 10
brands, ending up with 1,054 cells total, given purchase increment
minimums and free extras received. Every cell was scanned. Three sets
came from the well-known OEMs--Murata, Samsung, and Panasonic--sourced
from reputable online stores specializing in 18650 batteries. Three
sets came from the rewrap brands Efest, Vapcell, and Trustfire, with
Efest and Vapcell coming from reputable 18650 online storefronts, and
the Trustfire cells coming from their brand website. The final four
were more suspicious. I chose three of the brands for being lower
cost: Treasurecase and Maxiaeon came from Temu, Benkia from Amazon.
The SOOCOOL cells were not cheap, but were advertised on Amazon as
"authentic" Samsung 30Q cells, their wraps closely but not perfectly
mimicking the aesthetic of the genuine Samsung cells. A counterfeit
SOOCOOL "Authentic 30QP" next to an OEM Samsung 30Q cell. Table of
cells scanned for the experiment. Every battery was labeled on
arrival for traceability, then scanned as received. We scanned on a
Lumafield industrial CT system with a 130 kV microfocus source. Using
Ultra-Fast CT, we scanned each cell in under a minute, then processed
the data with our Battery Analysis Module, which automatically finds
electrode edges and extracts study metrics in bulk. Lumafield has two
industrial CT product lines: Neptune, a compact and easy-to-install
solution ideal for R&D offices and labs, and Triton, optimized for
high-volume environments. We built the workflow to reflect production
realities, because annual battery output is enormous and speed
determines practical value. In production, Triton paired with
Ultra-Fast CT can scan cylindrical cells in under five seconds,
enabling more than 720 cells per hour and making battery inspection
feasible at scale. To support what we saw in the CT scans, I added a
few supplementary tests. I measured capacity on one sample from each
set. Marketing claims as high as 9,900 mAh appeared on some of the
cell listings, a number that far exceeds what this format can
deliver, and the measurements confirmed the mismatch. We also ran
longer scans on a handful of cells to resolve more fine details and
validate the automated measurements. Defining characteristics of
battery quality The analysis focused on what governed safety. I
prioritized three parameters for anode overhang and two for
alignment. Median anode overhang per cell gave us a baseline for each
brand. I used median rather than mean because a few extreme outliers
would have distorted the averages. I also compared the maximum and
minimum anode overhang values for each cell. Insufficient overhang
increases the likelihood of lithium plating during charge, which
accelerates aging and raises the probability of internal shorts.
Alternatively, excessive anode length can reach the can and create a
different short path. For alignment, we calculated the delta between
the highest and lowest positions of both the cathode and the anode.
Cylindrical cells are wound, and telescoping introduced during
winding can become a seed for shorts and other defects. Large deltas
point to weak process control and higher risk elsewhere in the line.
Comparison of good and bad anode overhang. Side-by-side of ideal and
suspicious edge alignment. Findings: Far more variance than expected
The results aligned generally with our expectations, but the degree
of difference was surprising. OEM cells showed tight control, with
anode overhang centered near the 0.50 mm industry average and modest
telescoping. The rewraps generally matched the OEM medians quite
closely, though their spreads were wider, and the minimum overhang
tails in particular stretched lower. Trustfire stood apart from Efest
and Vapcell with a significantly worse distribution, a reminder that
rewraps are blind boxes that carry real risk. Unless you scan and
measure what you buy, you cannot be sure what exactly is hiding under
the sleeve. The low-cost and counterfeit group was in a league of its
own. Distributions were broader across every metric, and each brand
in this tier produced at least one unit with negative anode overhang.
The worst results came from the Temu brands. We found fourteen
Treasurecase and fifteen Maxiaeon cells with cathode overhang. Across
the entire low-cost group, thirty-three of 424 cells presented
cathode overhang, which suggests that as many as one in thirteen such
cells may carry geometry that accelerates aging and drives a higher
chance of internal shorting. The standard deviations ran roughly
seven times larger than the OEMs, which signals much weaker process
control and, by extension, a higher likelihood of other hidden
defects. Implications and recommendations These findings have
implications for every stakeholder that interacts with batteries,
from battery manufacturers and device integrators to end users.
Original battery manufacturers prioritize quality, and the study
results speak to their tight specifications and strong execution. The
risk for these companies sits downstream, with scrap potentially
making its way into the rewrap market, or OEM cells being "recycled"
and resold when end-of-life devices are dismantled. Scrutiny of scrap
procedures and channel partners, as well as improved traceability
features, can protect these brands from being tarnished by the
actions of less scrupulous players. Device integrators can reduce
their exposure to dangerous batteries by validating their supply with
incoming inspection, especially when buying through distributors or
less established sources. Battery incidents can seriously mar the
reputations of device integrators, making verification critical. Pack
design is also essential to ensure battery safety, as building in
sufficient spacing and protections can keep potential failures
limited to a single cell. Consumers must also actively manage their
individual battery risk exposure, given the gaps in supply chain and
regulatory oversight. It's important that users don't mix brands,
capacities, or ages in a shared device, that they protect cells from
physical abuse and extreme temperatures, and that end-of-life
batteries are recycled properly. Despite the popularity of "dupes,"
when it comes to batteries, the savings aren't worth the risk.
Consumers should also familiarize themselves with the warning signs
of battery incidents. Heat during or after charging, swelling or a
soft feel, hissing, sharp chemical odors, discoloration, liquid
residue, sudden drops in capacity, repeated shutdowns, or a charger
that refuses to start all suggest internal damage. If you see any of
these indicators, stop using the battery immediately and dispose of
it at a proper facility. Parting thoughts Today's volatile trade and
tariff environment is complicating cell provenance more than ever,
and it's becoming easier and more attractive to slip gray-market
substitutes into supply chains. In such a tumultuous ecosystem, CT
becomes a practical tool for certainty. Our 754 non-OEM cells were
mysteries until we scanned them, and while some matched OEM behavior,
others fell far outside any reasonable specification. Most failures
will never cause fires, but even a common reliability failure can
disrupt the functionality and experience of a product. The rare
battery incidents that do ignite are catastrophic, and this is why
battery quality is so fundamentally important. Negative anode
overhang and large irregularities in edge alignment do not guarantee
failure, but they put a heavy hand on the scale in the wrong
direction. Everyone who interacts with batteries, from cell
manufacturers and device integrators to the people who use their
products, should be intentional with managing these inherently
dangerous devices. The Lumafield Battery Quality Report reveals the
magnitude of risk in an uncontrolled battery supply chain. Industrial
CT inspection allowed us to unearth the risky realities of the 18650
cells we ordered, by turning some of those key quality indicators
into measurable geometry. Ultimately, CT is a powerful tool that can
make the invisible visible by bringing much-needed clarity to the
battery supply chain's unknowns. SEO Meta Description: A closer look
at the Battery Quality Report: methodology, surprising results, and
what CT scanning uncovered inside low-cost lithium-ion cells. CT
scans of 1,054 18650 batteries revealed major quality differences
between OEM, rewrap, and low-cost cells, with defects concentrated in
the cheapest brands. Negative anode overhang and poor alignment were
key risks, raising the chance of internal shorts, accelerated aging,
and thermal events. The study highlights supply chain vulnerabilities
and shows how CT can give manufacturers, integrators, and consumers
clearer visibility into battery safety.
 
The Quality Gap
Blind Spots in Electronics Quality
Anyone who has debugged a circuit board knows the feeling: one cold
joint or hidden bridge can take down an entire system. In mass
production, that same problem scales into yield loss, warranty
claims, and painful late-night root-cause hunts. What makes it worse
is that many of the defects causing intermittent or field failures
aren't visible to the naked eye or even to the inspection systems
most factories depend on.This is the reality of modern electronics
manufacturing. Solder defects are no longer surface problems. They're
buried under packages, inside layers, and beneath metal shields. And
while inspection tools have improved, most of the ones in daily use
were designed for a world of through-hole and early SMD components,
not for today's dense, fine-pitch assemblies.Evolution of a hidden
problemThrough-hole soldering and early surface-mount components gave
engineers plenty of visual feedback. You could see whether a joint
was smooth, shiny, and well-formed, or cold, cracked, or bridged. A
digital microscope and a steady hand were often enough to assess
quality.That changed in the 1990s when Motorola introduced the Ball
Grid Array (BGA). Instead of leads around the package edge, BGAs used
a grid of solder balls underneath. It was a breakthrough: thousands
of electrical connections in a tiny footprint. But it also created a
new kind of invisibility. The solder joints that mattered most were
now completely hidden.Optical inspection couldn't reach them.
Electrical tests could confirm continuity, but not explain why a
joint might fail under heat or stress. The industry turned to X-ray
imaging for answers.Hidden solder joints beneath a BGA packageWhat
X-rays can and can't seeTraditional 2D X-ray and automated optical
inspection (AOI) remain essential tools on any electronics line. AOI
quickly flags missing components, bridges, and surface anomalies.
X-ray systems can reveal hidden solder joints and flag major defects
like voids or bridging under BGAs. But these techniques share the
same limitation: they collapse three-dimensional data into a single
projection.That projection hides as much as it shows. Two defects may
overlap in the same line of sight, making them look like one. Tiny
voids, cracks, or head-in-pillow separations can sit just a few
microns apart, enough to pass a 2D X-ray check while still creating a
ticking time bomb for field reliability.For example, voids inside
solder joints reduce both electrical conductivity and thermal
transfer. A 2D image can suggest their presence, but not quantify
their true size or location. A void near the center of a solder ball
may be harmless, while one near the interface can cause catastrophic
detachment after a few hundred thermal cycles. The difference is
invisible without depth.CT cross-section showing voids within a BGA
solder ball array (Void fraction = 0.3%).The problem of scale and
densityAs packaging density increases, so does risk. A modern
smartphone board can have more than a thousand solder joints per
square inch, many under stacked memory, RF modules, or metal cans
that never come off again after final assembly.Quad Flat No-Lead
(QFN) devices compound the issue. Their large exposed center pads act
as both thermal and ground planes. Poor solder coverage here
increases resistance, leading to localized heating and sometimes
runaway failures. Industry guidelines recommend keeping voiding below
50 percent of the pad area, but without three-dimensional data that
is only a guess.Volumetric rendering of a QFN package analyzed using
Lumafield VoyagerThe Head-in-Pillow (HiP) defect is even more
deceptive. It occurs when a solder ball touches the pad without fully
bonding. The joint can pass electrical testing at room temperature,
only to fail later when the product heats up or bends. To an AOI or
2D X-ray system, HiP looks like a perfect joint. To the customer, it
looks like an RMA.Inspection blind spotsThe inspection toolbox most
factories rely on (AOI, in-circuit test, and 2D X-ray) was never
designed to see these issues in context. Each method provides one
piece of the puzzle:AOI: Fast, inexpensive, and effective for
surface-level defects, but blind to hidden joints.2D X-ray: Reveals
internal geometry, but lacks depth information and can't distinguish
stacked layers or subtle separations.Electrical test: Confirms
whether a circuit is open or shorted, but says nothing about why or
where mechanical failure will begin.Cross-sectioning: Offers a
definitive view, but it's destructive, slow, and limited to one small
sample.Each tool has its place, but none can fully capture how a real
solder joint behaves under heat, stress, and time.Seeing in three
dimensionsComputed tomography, or CT scanning, fills that gap not
because it replaces the tools above, but because it provides the
depth they lack. CT builds a true 3D reconstruction of a part by
rotating it under an X-ray beam and combining hundreds or thousands
of projection images. The result is a volumetric model that can be
sliced, measured, and analyzed from any angle.Comparison between a 2D
X-ray and a 3D CT reconstruction of a Raspberry Pi Zero.For engineers
dealing with solder defects, that means being able to see exactly
what's happening inside the joint. Is a void near the interface or
the center? Is a bridge a solid connection or just surface wetting?
Has the pad fully bonded, or is it a head-in-pillow separation
waiting to fail?CT data turns those questions into measurements. You
can calculate void fraction, measure ball alignment, and trace
microcracks that would otherwise go unseen. Most importantly, you can
do it on a fully assembled board without cutting it apart.From
failure analysis to process controlUntil recently, CT was confined to
the lab: expensive, slow, and limited to small samples. But faster
reconstruction algorithms and more compact systems have changed that.
Today, CT is used for first article inspection and even production
sampling to verify solder quality across builds.2D inspection remains
essential, but modern electronics demand escalation from surface
checks to full-volume analysis to explain why a board passes a test
one day and fails in the field the next. That is the quality gap that
CT closes.CT has also become a powerful process-improvement tool.
Engineers can overlay CT data across multiple builds to pinpoint
where voiding increases, where temperature profiles drift, or how pad
plating or paste variation influence joint integrity.In that sense,
three-dimensional inspection is less about defect hunting and more
about process learning. Every scan feeds back into how reflow
profiles are tuned, how stencils are cut, and how reliability
standards are enforced.What's next for quality managementThe
electronics industry has spent decades chasing better throughput and
automation. Inspection kept pace with that evolution until components
went fully hidden. Now, quality management faces a different
challenge: not moving faster, but going deeper. As assemblies become
smaller and denser, failure visibility becomes the defining metric.
Optical systems see the surface, two-dimensional X-ray sees the
outline, but only three-dimensional scanning sees the whole
truth.Every tool has its place in the line, and understanding their
limits is as important as knowing how to use them. The future of
solder quality is not about adding more automation. A defect you
can't see is one you can't prevent. Choosing the right level of
visibility for the risk you are managing is how you prevent the next
hidden flaw from escaping your line and reaching your customer.
 
Design to Reality
Building for the Brain: Pioneering a Long-Term Neural Implant
When you're building an implanted medical device for the brain, you
can't cut corners. Engineering for performance is a given when you're
designing for a living system. To ensure that there are no adverse
effects, an active implantable device cannot dissipate excessive
heat, or there could be a risk to the surrounding tissue. Every
decision, from materials, to power draw, and even packaging, is
shaped by the need to do no harm. Designing a medical device is a
totally different world from consumer electronics.Stakes of the
SystemAt Paradromics, we're building a brain-computer interface (BCI)
to restore speech for people with severe communication disorders:
conditions like ALS or spinal cord injury that disrupts the
connection between intention and expression. Our first product,
Connexus(r) BCI, records directly from the brain's speech centers and
synthesizes intended speech in real time.My focus as an electrical
engineer is on the Cortical Module itself. That's the component that
sits on the surface of the brain, and it's also the point where the
technical demands are highest. The Cortical Module must be reliable,
power-efficient, and manufacturable at scale. And it has to last a
long time; because we are not interested in devices that require
users to have brain surgery to replace their brain implant every two
years as with some technologies being explored by others. Our goal is
a device that never has to be replaced. That means every material
choice and assembly step matters.People often compare implants like
ours to wearable electronics, such as a smartwatch or continuous
glucose monitor, as they share some similar goals: small size, clean
data, minimal intrusion. But once you're under the skin, everything
changes. Now you're dealing with strict FDA regulations,
biocompatibility constraints, and failure modes with the highest
possible stakes.Incompressible TimelinesSome timelines are just
incompressible, and you have to come to terms with that. You can move
fast in design, but once the project moves into manufacturing and
validation, your pace becomes capped to that of regulation and
biology. I wish someone had told me going into this field, that even
with unlimited resources and engineering expertise, there are parts
of the process you simply can't speed up.Regulatory requirements
shape design from day one. Connexus BCI is classified as a Class III
medical device, the same category as a pacemaker. Implanted medical
devices are typically limited to known biocompatible materials, and
to support a minimum of a 10 year implant life that means materials
like titanium, platinum, and gold. You can try to get new materials
approved, but it's a much longer road. And when you're already
working on a novel device, it's wiser to avoid adding extra
unknowns.Building the Plane While Flying ItThere's no off-the-shelf
playbook for what we're doing. Our system isn't life-supporting like
a pacemaker, but it is life-enhancing. We work closely with the FDA
to define safety and benefit to the patient for a device that doesn't
quite fit their existing categories. We're being evaluated, while
also helping define the rules.The metaphor we use internally is
"building the plane while flying it." It may sound chaotic, but it's
just the reality of working in a space this new. You have to keep
moving forward, even while you're clearing the path beneath your
feet.Testing for the FutureThat pressure to get it right shows up
most in testing. Our devices go through a long chain of inspection,
step by step. Some processes require equipment so specialized there's
no commercial equivalent, meaning we have to do it ourselves. That's
why we use Lumafield's industrial CT scanner to evaluate process
outcomes and observe internal structures that can't be seen any other
way. It's one of the few tools that can keep up with the level of
precision we need.In addition to testing in a large animal model, we
also run accelerated aging tests, environmental stress simulations,
and strenuous mechanical validation to make sure our devices can
survive in the body for years. This includes checking for things like
thermal performance, electrode durability, and even the consistency
of raw materials from one vendor to another.Milestones That
MatterThis work isn't theoretical. Earlier this year, we completed
our first human implantation in a patient undergoing unrelated brain
surgery. The successful recording and data collection demonstration
confirmed that our device performs well in the real world. We saw the
kind of neural activity we expected and it validated years of animal
studies and lab work. That milestone puts us on the path toward an
Early Feasibility Study (EFS), a longer-term clinical investigation,
where the device stays in place and is used regularly by a small
number of participants. It's the next big step toward FDA
approval.Designed to StayI joined Paradromics right out of college in
2022, drawn to the cutting-edge intersection of engineering and
neuroscience. It's still a young field, and there's so much left to
figure out. But if we're going to make a real difference for
patients, we have to meet the body where it is. That means
durability, reliability, and empathy for the people at the center of
it all.This Cortical Module should feel less like a medical device
and more like a part of someone's life. If we can get there, we'll
have done our job.
 
Materials World
Comparing Wine Corks: Natural, Technical, and Synthetic
Corks have been critical components of wine preservation for
centuries, with origins dating back to the 1600s. Derived from the
bark of the cork oak tree, their elasticity and impermeability has
made cork the reigning king of closures. Cork oaks thrive in
Mediterranean regions, with Portugal producing over half of the
world's cork. Cork is harvested by carefully removing the bark
without harming the tree (every 9-12 years), allowing it to
regenerate and provide cork for years to come. Historically, cork's
unique structure has made it ideal for sealing wine bottles, but as
winemakers seek ways to overcome issues like TCA (trichloroanisole)
contamination and inconsistent oxygen ingress, alternatives like
technical and synthetic corks have started to give natural cork a run
for its money. How do these types of closures differ structurally?
Our Microfocus Neptune industrial CT scanner gives us comprehensive
insights into the composition and density variations between natural,
technical, and synthetic cork. Let's take a look.Natural CorkNatural
cork is an organic material composed of layers of cell walls,
primarily made up of the plant biopolymers suberin and lignin, which
give cork its signature flexibility and impermeability. Below in our
Voyager window, you'll find our CT scan of the cork. It shows a 2D
view of the cork's Z axis, and if you move the slider at the bottom
of the window from the right to the left, you can follow the path of
the corkscrew. You can toggle between 2D and 3D views by clicking the
Cardinal Z V button in the upper right corner of the window.Check out
the scanThe blue regions in the reconstructions represent
lower-density areas, while green and yellow are medium-, and red is
higher-density. The faint lines running diagonally across the cork
are growth rings. We can count 9 of them, representing as many years
of growth.What about the higher-density matter? The characteristic
speckled texture of cork stoppers is composed of holes called
lenticels, porous structures in the cork bark that facilitate gas
exchange. These openings lead to lenticular channels that are either
empty or filled with loose parenchyma tissue, which allow for air
movement. Surrounding these channels are higher-density cell walls
(green-yellow in the scan), creating a more rigid border. This
structure is critical for both the cork oak tree's respiration and
cork's role in sealing wine bottles.Cork is always cut perpendicular
to the grain to prevent the lenticels from creating direct channels
through the cork, which could allow oxygen ingress. This orientation
interrupts the lenticular channels with denser cork material,
ensuring the cork remains impermeable and provides a secure seal for
wine bottles.Controlled oxygen ingress through cork is beneficial for
wine aging by allowing a small amount of air to interact with the
wine and develop its flavors over time. However, inconsistencies in
natural cork, coupled with the risk of TCA contamination (which can
lead to spoiled, "corked" wine), have driven the industry to explore
closure options that embrace advances in manufacturing
technology.DIAM Technical CorkThe DIAM technical cork, first
introduced in the early 2000s, was developed to address TCA
contamination and inconsistent oxygen ingress in natural cork. In the
DIAM process, natural cork is ground into granules and then blasted
with supercritical CO2 to remove TCA and other impurities that could
affect the wine's aroma. DIAM leverages the natural strengths of cork
and preserves its sensory qualities without the liabilities that have
always accompanied it.During production, the cork's suberin--a highly
elastic component--is separated from lignin, which is less elastic and
discarded. The suberin is then combined with microscopic spheres
(similar to those used in contact lenses), filling the voids between
the cork particles and reducing porosity without increasing
humidity. Our scan of a DIAM 5 cork (5 grade because it's guaranteed
for a minimum of 5 years) reveals a strikingly uniform structure,
with an even distribution of both higher- and lower-density material
that ensures reliable oxygen ingress and minimizes variability. The
path of the corkscrew is clearer here, as the agglomeration process
appears to have reduced the self-healing qualities of natural
cork.Check out the scanThe suberin redistribution also enhances
elasticity, guaranteeing consistent performance across all corks. By
removing lenticels and controlling porosity, DIAM corks provide a
reliable seal without the risks of TCA or inconsistent aging,
offering a solution for wines requiring both short and medium-term
aging. And once DIAM establishes a track record for the long-term
aging of wines, we can expect to see it used more and
more.Vinventions NOMACORC Synthetic CorkThe Vinventions NOMACORC
synthetic cork, made using a patented co-extrusion process, consists
of an inner foam core that controls oxygen ingress and an outer
flexible skin for a tight seal. The skin even has a printed design to
mimic natural cork's growth lines and lenticels. In the scan, we
clearly see the highly-porous core, and the corkscrew's path is
unmistakable.Check out the scanVinventions claims the corks guarantee
highly precise oxygen ingress rates, with the NOMACORC Select Green
500 that we scanned rated for 3.1 mg of oxygen after 12 months, and
then 1.7 mg yearly thereafter. This control provides optimal oxygen
management for wines that benefit from more exposure earlier on in
their aging process. Unlike natural cork, synthetic corks are immune
to TCA contamination.Synthetic corks tend to allow more oxygen
ingress compared to natural or DIAM corks, which accelerates the
aging process of the wine. For wines meant to be consumed quickly,
this may not be a major issue, but for those intended for long aging,
the higher oxygen permeability could limit use of synthetic cork for
high-end wines. The VerdictWhen comparing these three corks with
industrial CT, we see a clear distinction in their structure and
performance. Natural cork, with its organic variability, provides a
time-honored but imperfect seal, subject to the risks of TCA and
oxygen variability. Technical corks offer a reliable, consistent
solution that mitigates the risks of contamination while maintaining
the characteristics of natural cork. Synthetic corks provide
durability and are free from TCA, but their higher oxygen
permeability makes them better suited for wines with shorter shelf
lives.In the end, the choice of cork depends on the winemaker's goals
and the intended lifespan of the wine. Natural cork remains an iconic
choice for premium, long-aging wines, while technical and synthetic
closures provide reliable alternatives for those looking to minimize
risks and ensure consistency. With industrial X-ray CT, we can better
understand a trajectory of design that began with nature and
continues to this day as packaging engineers and winemakers seek to
protect the quality of their wines without sacrificing the tactile
charm of cork.Learn more: CT 101
 
Recall Roundup
Fall on Fire
October runs hot. Pocketable gadgets smolder, wall-powered gear
misbehaves where doors, ducts, and consoles meet heat, and vehicles
remind us how small omissions ripple into busy spaces. A few welds
and joints call it quits under real loads, while kid gear and
clinical tools expose the quiet failures of access control and
visibility. None of this is exotic. It is energy looking for an exit
and interfaces aging faster than their spec sheets. Read the month as
a tour of thin margins, and you will see why the headlines keep
catching fire. Lithium-Ion batteries linger on the list Each month,
portable lithium-ion batteries are inevitably recalled. ESR's
HaloLock wireless power banks, Zyntony's Kogalla power banks, Anker
power banks, Living Glow portable waist fans, IcyBreeze Buddy
portable misting fans, and Arizer Solo II portable vaporizers were
all recalled for fire or burn hazards tied to lithium-ion batteries.
EcoFlow's Delta Max 2000 power stations were recalled for overheating
and ignition risk. These recalls are a testament to the sheer volume
of lithium-ion battery powered devices that are sold on a daily
basis. The Kogalla power banks represent the low end, with 2,400
devices impacted. In the middle, EcoFlow's Delta Max 2000 lands near
25,030 and Living Glow's portable waist fans sit around 48,000.
Anker's power bank recall, which encompasses five models, spans a
whopping 481,000 units. x The concentration of portable products with
overheating language signals a category risk where compact packaging,
varied charge profiles, and real-world usage stack the deck against
thermal margins. These parts might pass inspection initially, but for
devices that live in pockets, bags, and hot rooms, reliability is
key. One more entry belongs here even though it plugs in. iFIT's
NordicTrack rowing machines report screen console electronics that
can overheat and ignite, about 44,800 units in the United States and
about 700 in Canada. It is a reminder that small, insulated
electronics mounted on larger mains-powered products can face the
same overheating risks as portable devices. Seams under stress Where
heat and load meet, weak links show themselves. Sunbeam's Oster
French Door countertop ovens carry a burn hazard when doors can close
unexpectedly, with about 1,290,000 units in the United States and
about 104,195 in Canada affected. VESTA.DS VST tankless water heaters
can crack at the exhaust duct and release gases, including carbon
monoxide, indoors, about 36,700 units in the United States, plus
3,500 Canadian sales. RH's Byron tables and desks can collapse when a
gap opens at the leg to top interface, about 750 units, and Super
Wheels' Vaast A/1 bicycle frames can fracture near a weld, about
1,860 units. Ordinary parts can carry extraordinary consequences.
Doors that drift, ducts that fatigue, and welds that see side loads
become the story once heat and cycling pile up. Whether the tally is
a million units or a few hundred, the same pattern appears: failures
concentrate at thermal interfaces and load-bearing joints. This is
familiar physics at work, with thin margins revealed by use, time,
and temperature. Hazards at any speed Here the risks meet bystanders.
Textron E-Z-GO personal transportation vehicles can leak gasoline at
a quick-connect near the injector, about 90,800 units in the United
States plus Canadian sales. Yamaha fields two golf car campaigns, one
for missing stop lights in about 19,300 vehicles from model years
2021 to 2025, and one for potential brake failure in about 4,300
vehicles from model years 2017 to 2024. Wilteexs bioethanol fuel
bottles lack flame-mitigation devices and carry "Non Toxic" claims,
about 1,100 units, raising flash-fire risk. Different mechanics, same
exposure: small misses in connectors and signals become public
hazards in parking lots, paths, and garages. These are ordinary
environments, which makes them unforgiving. Parking lots, paths, and
garages leave little separation between a small defect and a person.
People read cues by habit; they assume brake lights exist and fuel
stays contained. When those assumptions fail, risk extends beyond the
user to everyone nearby. Small configuration splits across trims,
suppliers, or model years can escape notice until they show up in the
field. Fuel containers sit under the same quiet expectation, and
without flame mitigation a routine pour can turn into a flash event.
Small batteries, big risks Two children's products turn on a single
access point. About 740 LED tutu skirts sold by Bmrwtg allow easy
access to coin cells and lack the warnings required by Reese's Law.
About 3,000 Youbeien crib mobiles have remotes whose battery doors
can be opened without a common household tool. The scale is modest
compared with appliance recalls, but the hazard is concentrated and
severe. Small parts compliance is binary, and real-world handling
includes repeated openings, flex, and pry attempts by curious kids.
Battery enclosures and labeling must be treated as safety-critical,
with lot-to-lot checks and post-use fit tests. Patient safety at
stake Two medical device recalls sit squarely on reliability at the
point of care. On September 22, 2025, Olympus flagged ViziShot 2 FLEX
19G EBUS-TBNA needles for components that may detach during
procedures. On October 7, 2025, Trividia Health recalled TRUE METRIX
blood glucose meters for LCD defects that can affect performance.
Unit counts are not stated here, but both products inform clinical
decisions in real time, which raises the consequence of even limited
populations. In practical terms, devices must keep their components
secure and present clear, trustworthy readings. When either falters,
clinicians lose signal or confidence at the moment they need it most.
Patterns worth testing Look across October and the same physics keep
showing up. Thermal headroom and honest derating decide whether packs
and console boards stay uneventful. Containment and vent paths
determine if fuel and exhaust stay where they belong. Doors, latches,
ducts, and weld toes carry more safety load than their bill of
materials suggests. On low-speed vehicles, stop lights and braking
are the guardrails for shared space. In children's products, safety
turns on controlled access to coin cells and correct warnings. In
clinical tools, it depends on parts that stay attached and displays
that stay readable. The misses rarely sit in the marquee component.
They live in a hinge that lost hold-open force, a quick-connect that
seeped under vibration, an exhaust duct that thinned with heat, a
display interconnect that drifted, a battery door that loosened after
use, a weld toe that carried side load. Treat this month as a map of
where engineering time tends to matter most: thermal interfaces,
joints under side load, basic vehicle signaling, and battery access.
Use it to prioritize test time and supplier controls in the next
build cycle. Curious how I keep track of this constant barrage of
recalls? Check out our new Recall Roundup tool to access a
comprehensive database of product recalls, updated daily from CPSC
and NHTSA records. We also discuss recalls in every episode of our
podcast, Go/No-Go.
 
From The Floor
Finding Lead in Stanley's Quencher
In a remarkable story of product innovation, Stanley became, in the
words of its Global President Terence Reilly, a "110-year-old
overnight success." The company's journey from inventing the first
vacuum-sealed water bottle in 1913 to becoming a TikTok sensation
began with the launch of the Quencher tumbler in 2016. The Quencher
initially saw modest success, but a strategic shift in 2020 towards
vibrant new colors and finishes caught the eye of a new generation of
consumers. This pivot, coupled with savvy social media marketing and
influencer collaborations, caused Stanley's revenue to skyrocket from
$70 million in 2019 to $750 million in 2023.More recently, the same
social media enthusiasm that propelled Stanley to new heights has
revealed itself as a double-edged sword. Social media influencers
have discovered that lead solder is used in the Quencher's
manufacturing process, jeopardizing Stanley's success. But is the
lead in the Quencher actually dangerous? Our Neptune industrial X-ray
CT scanner is the perfect tool to see inside Stanley's tumbler to
understand how it's made and whether or not lead solder truly poses a
risk to consumers.Stanley's cups have inner and outer walls made of
stainless steel, separated by a vacuum that minimizes heat transfer.
The manufacturing process for vacuum-insulated stainless steel
containers starts by forming two separate stainless steel layers for
the inner and outer walls, which are then welded together at the rim
to create a sealed unit. The cup is placed in a vacuum chamber, and
air is removed through a hole that's left in the bottom of the outer
layer.At this point, the hole through which air was evacuated must be
sealed before the cup is removed from the vacuum chamber. Lead solder
provides a reliable and cost-effective answer. During the assembly of
the inner and outer layers, a small lead pellet is placed above the
air-escape hole. After the air is pulled out of the cup, the vacuum
chamber is heated just enough to melt the lead, causing it to flow
into the air escape hole and seal it. When the vacuum chamber is
opened, a vacuum remains between the cup's walls.In our CT scans, we
can clearly see the inner and outer stainless steel flask layers, as
well as the solder point. We also see a metal disk attached to a
welded tab, which may be a component used to position the solder and
hold it in place before it's melted. Dense materials or those made of
elements with higher atomic numbers attenuate (absorb or scatter)
X-rays more. Lead is very dense and tends to block X-rays, which is
why it's used to protect people from X-ray radiation. In Voyager,
we've applied a color map to the reconstruction that corresponds to
the range of material attenuation coefficients. Lead, the most
attenuating, appears here as a solid red. The scan shows that the
lead solder is completely shielded by a stainless steel cover just
below it.Stanley issued a statement saying, "Once sealed, this area
is covered with a durable stainless steel layer, making it
inaccessible to consumers. Rest assured that no lead is present on
the surface of any Stanley product that comes into contact with the
consumer nor the contents of the product. In the rare occurrence the
base cap of a product comes off due to ordinary use and exposes this
seal, it is eligible for our Lifetime Warranty." Leaded solder,
despite its known health risks, remains widely used in various
industries, including electronics, due to its superior workability
and lower melting point compared to unleaded alternatives. The
Stanley revelation has sparked a debate on the difficult trade-offs
manufacturers face between continuing with a well-established but
potentially harmful material or investing in the development of
safer--albeit more expensive and technically
challenging--alternatives.In response to the controversy, other
reusable water bottle companies have been highlighting their
lead-free manufacturing processes. Brands like Owala, Hydro Flask,
and Klean Kanteen have successfully eliminated lead from their
products, opting for alternative materials such as noncrystalline
silica beads or proprietary sealants. These companies demonstrate
that while the transition to lead-free manufacturing is complex and
costly, it is feasible and aligns with growing consumer demand for
environmentally friendly and safe products.As consumers become more
discerning about the products they buy, the pressure on companies to
not compromise on safety or sustainability will only increase.
Perhaps just as important as continued innovation is educating
consumers on the relative risks associated with materials and
manufacturing processes. Proactively demystifying the product's
lifecycle and design choices could mean the difference between
soaring success and a viral backlash.
 
Materials World
From Rust to Silicon: A Week of Storage Media
Before storage vanished into silicon, it lived on film, glass, and
metal. The moving parts and chemical coatings of these physical
systems responded to specific engineering constraints and the demands
of their respective moments. This week we use industrial CT to
examine how five iconic formats worked, how they evolved, and why
some still matter.Day 1: Magnetic TapeMagnetic tape appears outdated
at first glance. It predates microprocessors, uses sequential access,
and sits in silent racks. But it quietly stores much of the
internet's long-term memory. What explains its persistence?Tape began
in the 1950s with mainframes writing data to reels of acetate or PET
film coated in iron oxide. In the 1980s, home computers like the
VIC-20 used audio cassettes to store data as modulated tones, slow at
50 bytes per second, but accessible and cheap. Its survival comes
down to physics and economics. Tape is a PET strip coated in magnetic
particles, written to by aligning domains with a read/write head.
It's not fast, but it is dense, efficient, and durable.LTO, or Linear
Tape-Open, refines this idea. Cartridges use serpentine writing
across dozens of tracks. LTO-9 holds up to 45 terabytes compressed,
with built-in error correction. Stored offline, these cartridges are
immune to ransomware and accidental deletion.A 2024 report shows LTO
shipments hitting 176.5 exabytes compressed, a 15 percent rise. IEEE
Spectrum notes that tape, once written, uses no power and retains
data longer and more affordably than disk or flash. As IBM's Mark
Lantz put it, "The technology hasn't been frozen in time. Quite the
contrary."LTO remains the archival medium of choice for Amazon,
Google, and CERN; it lasts up to 30 years under the right conditions.
What may first look like legacy analogue tech turns out to be a
refined archive engine designed for decades of reliable
operation.Give the CT scan of the LTO a spin in our Voyager window
above. Internal reels, guide rollers, and reinforced structures
reveal a tightly engineered storage system designed for precision and
longevity. Tape, it turns out, is built to last.Day 2: Floppy Disks
and PocketZipFloppy disks made personal computing portable and
practical. The first commercial version (the truly floppy one),
released in 1971, was 8 inches across and held just 80 kilobytes. It
paved the way for more manageable sizes. By the late 1970s, the
51/4-inch disk became standard for early home and business computers,
offering between 360 kilobytes and 1.2 megabytes of storage.In the
1980s, a more durable format emerged: the 31/2-inch floppy. Its rigid
plastic shell (no longer physically floppy) and metal shutter
protected the magnetic film inside, reducing dust contamination and
physical damage. At 1.44 megabytes, it could store documents, program
files, or even entire operating systems. These disks became a
defining storage format for the personal computing era, remaining in
common use into the early 2000s. Even today, the floppy icon still
represents the Save function on many programs.Iomega's Zip and
PocketZip formats attempted to extend this logic. The original Zip
disk reached 750 megabytes by the end of its run. PocketZip, launched
in 1999, packed 40 megabytes into a cartridge roughly the size of a
matchbook. Its performance was impressive for the time, but the
format suffered from alignment issues and media wear. The rapid rise
of USB flash drives and solid-state storage soon rendered it
obsolete.In the scan of the 3.5-inch floppy, we see the dense,
layered magnetic disk enclosed in its rigid plastic shell. The
sliding metal shutter, which protects the media surface, is
reinforced and spring-loaded. Also note the fine pitch of the
read-write aperture and the minimal clearance between moving parts:
tolerances that allowed reliable operation despite the format's
physical simplicity.Day 3: ROMBefore optical discs and downloadable
software, ROM cartridges were the primary medium for consumer
electronics. Popularized by consoles like the Atari 2600 and Nintendo
Entertainment System (NES), these plastic modules held pre-programmed
data on a silicon chip known as mask ROM. When inserted into a
console, the system could execute software directly from the
cartridge without the need to copy data into RAM.Each cartridge
housed a printed circuit board, a ROM chip, and a set of exposed edge
connectors. These aligned with spring-loaded contacts in the console,
forming a direct electrical path. Unlike magnetic or optical media,
ROM chips had no moving parts. They offered fast load times, physical
durability, and built-in copy protection. But manufacturing was
expensive, and the memory was fixed at fabrication.Many users
remember blowing into the cartridge to fix loading issues. This
ritual sought to remove dust from the contacts, but it was rarely
effective and often counterproductive. Moisture from breath could
corrode the gold or nickel-plated pins over time. The real issue was
usually poor contact alignment or oxide buildup on the connector
surfaces.Though cartridges faded as storage expanded and costs fell,
they remain in use today in embedded systems and industrial
equipment, where durability and immutability still matter.Our CT scan
of a ROM cartridge shows the chip mounted directly to the PCB with
clean solder joints and a rigid housing. The edge connector is
precisely spaced, designed to maintain tight electrical contact even
after thousands of insertions.Day 4: Magneto-Optical
DiscsMagneto-Optical (MO) discs blend magnetic and optical storage
principles in a single hybrid system. Commercialized in 1985, they
offered erasable, high-reliability storage long before affordable
writable CDs appeared. MO media was typically 5.25-inch or 3.5-inch
cartridges. The smaller version appeared in 1991 with capacities from
about 128 MB up to 1.3 GB.MO writing uses a two-step process: a laser
heats a magnetic film spot to its Curie point. A magnetic head on the
opposite side then sets the domain orientation. Reading uses a
lower-power laser to detect changes in polarization caused by the
Kerr effect. Time-consuming though it was, verification after writing
made it highly reliable and durable, with tens of millions of rewrite
cycles possible.Enterprise archives like legal, medical, or media
libraries looked to MO disks as a durable alternative to tape or
early optical media. The cartridges physically protected surfaces
from dust and fingerprints, and the media could tolerate temperature
and humidity variations better than early CDs.Our scan shows a thick
ferromagnetic recording layer enclosed in robust polycarbonate
casing. The dual-side configuration leaves just enough room for both
the laser window and precise magnetic write head spacing. The
cartridge's sturdy guide system ensures laser alignment and minimal
contact pressure.Day 5: Hard Drives and Solid StateHard drives store
data magnetically on spinning platters made of glass or aluminum,
coated with cobalt alloy or iron oxide. Read and write heads hover
nanometers above the surface to flip magnetic domains as the platters
rotate. Consumer drives typically spin at 5,400 or 7,200 RPM.
Multi-platter setups allow higher capacity by stacking more heads and
surfaces in a compact enclosure.These drives helped shape modern
computing, offering fast random access and low cost per gigabyte. But
they are vulnerable to shock, wear, and latency limits.Solid-state
drives replaced moving parts with NAND flash memory. Floating-gate
transistors retain charge without power, enabling fast,
shock-resistant, and silent operation. SSD controllers manage data
distribution, wear leveling, and error correction. NVMe models use
direct PCIe access to deliver transfer speeds beyond 7 GB/s.SSDs have
grown rapidly in both performance and reliability. According to Ars
Technica, five years of data from Backblaze show that SSDs fail far
less often than hard drives over time.The CT scan of a Lite-On SSD
shows NAND packages arranged around a central controller. You can see
dense surface-mount components, multi-layer routing, and clean solder
joints.Storage for PosterityIf future engineers scanned today's
storage media a hundred years from now, what would they learn about
how we valued information?Over five days, we examined storage formats
that shaped computing: tape, floppy, ROM, optical, and solid state.
Each one reflects tradeoffs between speed, cost, permanence, and
complexity.Industrial CT shows these are not just passive containers.
They are engineered systems, often with precision far beyond what
their plastic shells suggest. Even the most outdated format holds
clues about the priorities and constraints of its time, saying as
much about us as the data it holds.
 
Design to Reality
Heinz's Sustainable Ketchup Cap
Heinz has taken a major step forward for sustainable packaging with
the introduction of its first fully recyclable ketchup cap, made
possible through a pioneering collaboration with Berry Global.
Combining complex engineering with simple materials, Heinz's
achievement offers a model for manufacturers in consumer packaged
goods (CPG) as well as food and agriculture at large to strive for
waste reduction by designing more environmentally-friendly
products.Industrial CT is the perfect tool for exploring the
intricacies of Heinz's new cap design without damaging it, even while
it's fully assembled and closed. Let's take a look.Mono-material
constructionThe old cap featured a silicone valve, which posed
recycling challenges. The new cap's uniform composition of
polypropylene (PP) simplifies recycling and can be accepted by any
facility that processes plastic #5. Currently only about 3% of PP
products are being recycled in the United States, but it is becoming
more widely accepted. The new cap appears as a uniform color in
Voyager's range map, indicating that it's entirely made of the same
material. Compare it to the old cap, whose silicone valve is denser
than the surrounding plastic.The dense silicone ring (left) presents
obstacles for recycling. The new mono-material cap (right) is of a
uniform density.Innovative valve designThe new design leverages
ketchup's shear-thinning property to dispense the perfect amount.
Ketchup requires a specific amount of pressure to flow. When the
bottle is squeezed, it moves through the outer channels where the
wall separating them from the inner channels plays a crucial role.
The wall prevents the ketchup from flowing back and directs it toward
the antechamber, building the necessary pressure for the ketchup to
pass through the nozzle efficiently.Once the squeezing stops, the
ketchup's viscosity increases, preventing drips and mess. This design
ensures a clean and controlled dispense of the product.Views from
below (left) and above (right) of the Heinz ketchup cap's valve
channelsIndustrial CT and sustainabilityDeveloping sustainable
packaging can present a significant engineering challenge. Recyclable
plastics often don't perform as well as their non-recyclable
counterparts, and reducing material usage can mean that safety
factors are reduced as well. Effective, sustainable packaging
requires careful design and lots of fine tuning.Industrial CT plays a
pivotal role in the development of sustainable packaging, offering a
non-invasive method to analyze, refine, and perfect packaging
solutions. By reducing the need for physical prototypes, CT scanning
accelerates the development process, cuts down on waste, and helps
avoid the costs associated with scrapped prototypes and recalled
products. It embodies the convergence of innovation and
sustainability, offering a blueprint for the packaging industry's
next steps.Advanced Surface Capture technology can help manufacturers
tell the whole story of their sustainability efforts by visualizing
areas that are otherwise impossible to capture--those hidden by
overhangs as well as shiny and reflective surfaces.Heinz's recyclable
cap is more than just an innovation; it's a statement of intent,
reflecting a broader commitment to environmental sustainability. The
cap's successful redesign, fueled by a $1.2 million investment and
extensive testing, demonstrates the potential for significant waste
reduction--up to 300 million plastic caps annually--and a future where
packaging is fully recyclable, reusable, or compostable.Learn
moreDownload our free white paper Removing Obstacles to Sustainable
Packaging and discover how industrial x-ray CT can help packaging
engineers create solutions that work.
 
Design to Reality
How Does a Car Cigarette Lighter Work?
Remember this? Cigarette lighters were universal accessories in cars
until the mid-1990s. We put one in a CT scanner to see how it works
and discovered a marvel of efficient, low-cost analog design.Check
out the video below to see the cigarette lighter in action and walk
through the CT scans with us:An analog systemA cigarette lighter in a
car connects to a 12V DC power supply. To heat it up, you press the
handle in. It starts to draw current, and after a few moments, the
handle pops up, revealing a glowing coil hot enough to ignite a
cigarette. You might think such a system would involve a thermostat,
a microcontroller, and an actuator, but this design, developed in the
1950s, is entirely analog and optimized for simplicity and
cost-efficiency.Type image caption here (optional)Examining the CT
scansWe used a Neptune industrial CT scanner to capture detailed
scans of the lighter. This scanner works on the same principle as a
medical CT scanner, capturing X-ray images from different angles and
reconstructing them into a 3D model.Lighter in the popped-out
positionIn this scan, the lighter assembly is in its popped-out
position, as it would be after heating. By stripping away the less
dense plastics, we isolated the metal components for a clearer
view.Give the lighter a spin for yourself in the Voyager window
below:Cutting into the model, we see the removable lighter with a
large bolt fixing the plastic handle. Surrounding the handle is a
single coil spring. The heating element is visible in the center,
with another bolt below it attached to the arms of a spring clip. The
coloring indicates relative material density, showing stamped steel
and a ceramic insulator around the lower bolt.Lighter in the
pushed-in positionNext, we examined the lighter after the handle has
been pushed in, simulating its heating configuration. The heating
element is held in place by the spring clip, creating a circuit.In a
car, the bottom bolt connects to a positive lead, and the housing tab
connects to a negative lead. Current flows through the isolated bolt,
the spring arms, the outer rim of the heating element, the heating
coil, the center bolt, and finally back to the negative terminal. The
current is forced through the high-resistance coil due to a tiny gap
insulated by a strip of paper, preventing it from taking a shorter
path.Detail: Heating elementA closer look at the heating element
reveals its design. The coil, made of nickel-chromium alloy, is
bonded to the surrounding shield on one end and the center bolt on
the other. Each loop is oxidized, insulating it from adjacent loops
and forcing the current to traverse the entire resistive
filament.Pop-out mechanismThe spring clip, which holds the lighter in
its depressed position and conveys current, has bimetallic arms with
steel on the outer surface and copper on the inner surface. As the
filament heats up, the arms warm up, causing the copper to expand
faster than the steel. This expansion pushes the arms open, releasing
the lighter. The coil spring then causes the handle to pop out,
signaling that the lighter is ready.ConclusionThis entirely analog
device, developed in the 1950s, showcases the ingenuity of efficient,
low-cost design, capable of being manufactured by the millions
without any digital control.You can explore these scans yourself in
the Voyager. If you'd like to learn more about industrial X-ray CT
technology and how engineers use it to improve everything from
running shoes to medical devices, check out our introductory video or
reach out to our team.
 
Design to Reality
How I Think About R&D (and Turning Ideas Into Products)
R&D in a startup is not a separate function. It's an integral part of
the product development process, especially in the early stages when
requirements are uncertain, the solution is unclear, and the risk is
high. At Lumafield, I've worked on everything from early prototypes
to complete product features like offset scanning and calibration
systems. Over time, I've learned that effective R&D is not about
having a perfect process. It is about thinking clearly, experimenting
deliberately, and staying grounded in first principles. Here's how I
approach the work. 1. Start with first principles When tackling a new
technical problem, I begin by reducing it to the fundamentals:
physics, geometry, mechanical constraints. Early on, you often cannot
rely on precedent. You need to understand what is objectively true
and work forward from there. This mindset helped us build scanning
capabilities when we were still new to tomography. We didn't import
solutions from other companies. Instead, we reasoned through the
challenges ourselves. This took more effort up front but allowed us
to invent solutions that fit our specific needs and constraints. 2.
Prototype to learn In the early stages of product development, the
purpose of a prototype is not to impress. It is to test a hypothesis.
A prototype should reduce uncertainty. Can we hit the resolution
target? Will the calibration approach scale? Can we build this
cost-effectively? Sometimes the result is positive. Sometimes not.
Either way, it moves the work forward. The key is to be clear about
what you are trying to prove and avoid refining the details too
early. 3. Use literature to build smarter and faster We often begin
with a literature review to understand the problem space. Research
papers can clarify what has already been done, what techniques are
available, and where current limitations exist. This helps frame our
approach. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. When researchers
have already solved part of a problem or developed a method that fits
into our pipeline, we use it. Applying proven components can
accelerate development and avoid unnecessary work. However, most
published research is not optimized for product integration. Methods
may assume ideal conditions, ignore cost constraints, or require
infrastructure that is not practical in our environment. That is
where adaptation comes in. We borrow selectively, simplify when
possible, and focus on what works reliably within our system.
Understanding the principles behind a solution is more valuable than
reproducing every detail. Our goal is not to replicate research but
to apply it thoughtfully to build products that perform in the real
world. 4. Align R&D with product outcomes Our work is driven by
product needs. Sometimes a request comes from the product team or a
customer. Other times, we explore an internal idea that we believe
could unlock value. In both cases, we scope experiments tightly. We
aim to answer key questions within a few days or weeks. This helps us
avoid chasing technically interesting ideas that do not translate
into real product improvements. If a solution is imperfect but solves
the problem in a useful way, that is often enough. 5. Focus on what
customers actually need In many cases, product requirements aren't
fixed. Customers may request specific performance targets, but in
practice their needs are more flexible. We've tested configurations
that technically fall short of a stated requirement. Yet the results
were good enough that the customer was satisfied, and even impressed.
Part of product development is figuring out where precision matters
and where it doesn't. That doesn't mean lowering the bar. It means
delivering meaningful outcomes based on real constraints. At
Lumafield, we're making advanced analysis software so accessible that
you can even access our 3D CT scans on your phone. 6. Collaborate
across functions R&D is rarely isolated. We work closely with teams
across the company--engineering, product, customer success--to connect
our experiments to real problems. Sometimes we initiate new product
ideas. Other times, we help refine or extend features that already
exist. In both cases, collaboration is critical. It ensures we're not
solving problems in a vacuum and helps us integrate what we build
into the broader system. At a startup, where responsibilities
overlap, this cross-functional alignment becomes even more important.
7. Tie research to real impact Good R&D demonstrates what's possible,
but great R&D leads to measurable improvements. For example, I've
spent the past two years developing a new calibration method. The
goal was not theoretical accuracy. It was to improve every scanner in
the field with a software-only update. This opened new use cases,
improved customer outcomes, and increased the value of our existing
products. It's easy to get lost in technical complexity. Staying
focused on real product outcomes keeps the work grounded. 8. Tools
help, but mindset matters more We use a range of tools. Cursor has
helped me write software more efficiently. Mechanical prototyping
tools let us test physical ideas quickly. These tools matter. But
they're not the deciding factor. What really drives R&D is the right
mindset. Are you curious? Are you willing to test assumptions? Do you
stay focused on solving the right problem? A thoughtful, iterative
mindset will take you further than any single piece of software or
hardware. Final thought R&D in a startup requires balancing speed,
rigor, and practicality. You're working with uncertainty. You're
building things that may not work. But you're also learning quickly
and making decisions that shape the final product. I have found that
the most effective approach is to start from first principles, define
clear questions, and work in tight feedback loops. You don't need to
be certain about everything. You just need to make consistent
progress toward something real. That mindset (not just technical
ability) is what moves a product from concept to reality.
 
The Quality Gap
How People Drive Quality
When people think about quality in manufacturing, they often think of
documentation like certifications, processes, and forms. That stuff
definitely matters, but it's not the core of it. What really drives
quality is people: how they work, how they think, and whether the
system around them helps them succeed or sets them up to fail. That's
the lens I brought to Lumafield after working in medical devices,
where the bar for quality is high, and for good reason. What Medical
Devices Taught Me About Quality Before Lumafield, I worked in a
highly regulated environment under ISO 13485, which is the quality
standard for medical device manufacturers. In that world, trusting
that someone made a good product isn't enough; you have to prove it,
every step of the way. What's interesting about medical device
manufacturing is that it doesn't control the certification of the
individuals designing a product, like the certified PE (Professional
Engineers) in civil engineering. Technically, anyone can sketch out a
medical device. What the certification does control is how that
product gets built and tested. That means heavy documentation: from
ideation and risk analysis, to design verification and validation, to
production release and traceability. Every requirement needs to be
documented, and every product needs to be tested against those
requirements, with a full paper trail to back it up. I spent a lot of
time in that system, and while some parts felt rigid, it also taught
me how robust a good quality system can be. Every step exists to
build confidence, minimize risk, and create repeatability. That
experience gave me a foundation for how I think about quality now,
even in a startup where we don't have formal certifications (yet).
What Quality Looks Like at a Startup At Lumafield, we've had to
figure out what quality means without that external structure. We go
beyond the safety standards our product is certified for, despite it
not being required. Because even without a certifying body breathing
down our neck, we care about building reliable products, and we know
that just "building it right the first time" doesn't scale. So
instead of a formal QMS, we rely on a culture where every individual
with hands on our hardware cares about product quality, and we enable
those individuals with practical implementations of the
bread-and-butter tools of manufacturing: detailed work instructions,
in-process checks, and a responsive NCR process. Our focus is always
on improving quality where the action is happening, not somewhere
buried deep in a stack of SOPs. We want our operators to have the
tools and information they need to reliably build quality products
safely. That sounds simple, but we've come a long way since we
started. When I joined, there was no structure yet--no standard for
how instructions were written, no consistent way to track build
issues, no process for root cause analysis. We've built that all from
the ground up. What We Catch, and When Ideally, we'd catch every
problem before it gets to the floor. That's the goal with things like
first article inspections and incoming quality checks. But at this
stage, with how lean our manufacturing team is, we've had to make
strategic tradeoffs. We can't inspect every part, so we need to take
calculated risks on where it's more efficient to catch issues later
on the production line and where we need to spend the resources to
catch issues upon receipt. It's a burn rate we accept. We'll pay a
little more for extra parts or expedited shipping if it means we can
stay flexible and move quickly to meet our customer's needs.
Eventually, that'll change. As we scale, it'll make more sense to
increase our investment in prevention. But right now, we pick our
battles. Some parts are high-risk or high-cost, and we'll spend the
time checking those. Others, we let go and monitor downstream. That
balance will keep shifting as we grow, but our culture where
everyone, every step of the way, is invested in making quality
products will remain the bedrock of how we build our hardware.
Helping Build Techs Check Their Work One thing we're pushing on with
Triton is giving our build techs the ability to check their own work
earlier. Right now, they're really good at understanding how parts go
together, because good mechanical design communicates that on its
own. But when we get into more complex subsystems, like motion
platforms wrapped in shielding and packed into tight spaces, things
get murky. If it doesn't work at the end, there are too many places
to look. Instead of having our technicians blindly checking off items
on a list, we're building in subsystem testing to enable them to
"check their own work" and learn from their mistakes. If we can test
a motion platform before it's wrapped up in the system, we isolate
any issues and fix them while things are still accessible. It's a
huge time saver, and it makes debugging much more predictable.
Designing Quality In The biggest factor that enables us to take this
practical approach to quality is the thought that goes into the
design of our hardware products. As Murphy's Law states "if something
can go wrong, it will". In hardware that means if a part can be
installed incorrectly, it will be installed incorrectly. It's just a
matter of time. That means the right move is to design the part so
that incorrect isn't possible. That may sound like just common sense,
but it's actually a core principle in any good quality system. At
Lumafield, our hardware engineers live this mantra by heavily
prioritizing getting hands-on with what they design. They're on the
floor turning wrenches, seeing what's intuitive and what isn't, and
quickly making improvements. That feedback loop is gold. It mitigates
all but the most manageable risks so that our manufacturing team is
set up for success. It allows us to continue manufacturing consistent
products as the people and the production environment change.
Systems, Not Just Screws At Lumafield, we're building scanners. But
more importantly, we're building the system that builds the scanners,
and it's a system that will have to scale, adapt, and improve over
time. That's why we're hiring more manufacturing engineers now. Not
to turn screws, but to support the whole process: the practical tools
and the problem-solving systems that make it possible to build the
same thing well, over and over. That's what quality really is.
Compliance and control are just the beginning. What matters most is
taking pride in the little things that bring joy to your customers.
It's about making right-sized solutions so those on the front lines
can do their jobs well and get better over time. All too often,
manufacturing teams lose sight of this; getting the paperwork/
documentation right starts to overshadow getting the product right.
Only through thoughtful systems, good design, and people who care can
you consistently deliver quality to your customers.
 
From The Floor
Inside a 12-Month Sprint from Concept to Factory-Ready Product
 
Materials World
Materials That Make or Break a Shoe
When I first started cutting shoes in half, I thought quality was
just about what you get for your money. Do you get higher quality
materials or not? But once I started learning more about barefoot
shoes, I realized that there's more to comfort than just materials.
The shape of the last matters. Fit matters. There's so much more to
it than meets the eye.Quality is a multifaceted thing. Materials,
aesthetic, and fit are indispensable elements of it, but the way you
use the shoes is what puts quality to the test. You have to gather as
much information as possible to find the right shoe for your needs.
Do you have wide feet? Then you need a wide shoe. Are you doing heavy
duty work? You need something durable enough for that. Winter? You
need insulation and grip. The problem is that most people don't even
know what's inside footwear unless you literally cut it in half.Myths
about brands and countriesI run a YouTube channel called Rose Anvil,
where I cut shoes and boots in half to learn about their
construction. What started as just wanting to understand why some
boots last decades and others fall apart in months has turned into
hundreds of detailed teardowns. I've cut open more than 500 pairs,
from luxury brands to bargain-bin imports, and what I've found along
the way has changed how I think about quality, value, and the way
things are made."Over the last 500 pairs of shoes I've cut open, I've
seen how older brands that get bought and sold over and over end up
strip-mining all the value."One of the biggest misconceptions of
footwear manufacturing is that brands with long histories are
automatically better. Over the last 500 pairs of shoes I've cut open,
I've seen how older brands that get bought and sold over and over end
up strip-mining all the value. They squeeze margins to pay off the
business deal and the end consumer foots the bill.A craftsman
stitches the upper of a leather boot, guiding each curve by hand to
ensure strength, precision, and a perfect fit.Same with countries.
Many people automatically assume that everything made in China is
garbage. But look at Grant Stone. They produce some of the highest
quality footwear in the world, and it's made in China. On the other
side, you've got the $10 boots you see on Temu, where you don't even
know what will show up. Is that China's fault, or is that because
people want to buy something for $5 that should cost $50?"The factory
will build to whatever standard the brand sets."It's easy to blame
where something's made, but the truth usually comes down to choices
made higher up. The factory will build to whatever standard the brand
sets. When Dr. Martens moved most of their production out of England,
people were right to complain. The quality dropped. But that wasn't
because the factories overseas couldn't make them well. It was
because the company told those factories to make cheaper boots to
boost margins. They could have kept the same quality at a lower
price, but they chose not to.Reading leather without cutting itMany
people ask me how to assess the quality of leather. Here are a few
signs you can look for. If you can see the raw edge, look at the
fibers. Toward the top, closer to the smooth surface, the fibers
should get really fine, almost solid. That means the grain is intact,
which is the most sought-after part of leather. It looks smooth, but
it's also really strong because it binds all the looser suede fibers
together."As a general rule, the more real leather you see in
footwear, the higher the quality."Feel matters too. If leather feels
foamy, dry, or like it could crack and fall apart, that's obviously
not a positive sign. If it feels almost wet to the touch or like it
has conditioner or oil in it, that usually means they went the extra
mile in finishing. As a general rule, the more real leather you see
in footwear, the higher the quality. Rose Anvil x White's Sundance
Boot updates the classic Packer with a lighter build, high arch, and
hand-sewn stitchdown craftsmanship made in Spokane,
Washington.Pigskin is an interesting use case. It's thinner than
cowhide, but has a tighter fiber structure and big pores. Sometimes
the pores even go all the way through. That makes it breathable and
strong in thinner cuts. You can make an unlined pigskin boot that's
lightweight, durable, and breathable in a way you can't with cowhide.
The downside is the hides are smaller and supply is limited, so it's
ultimately harder to work with.Materials that fail and materials that
lastEveryone has probably worn through the inside heel of a shoe.
That's one of the most common failure points. Higher-quality boots
often have a suede or roughout leather cover inside the heel. It
grips better, molds to your heel, and resists abrasion.Underfoot
tells another story. For centuries people stood on leather midsoles.
Leather shapes to your foot, absorbs sweat, and doesn't smell as
much. It's also expensive and firmer than foams, which is why rubber
and foams have taken over. Foams are cheaper, softer right away, but
they don't last as long.If you pull the insole and look underneath,
you'll see what you're really standing on. Is it leather, fiberboard,
or just thin fabric? That's an excellent indicator of the lifespan
you can expect from a shoe.Buying smarter with materials in mindDon't
trust the brand name alone. Feel the shoe for yourself. Look at it
closely. Compare it to other shoes at the same price point. There is
a minimum buyable product. If you're buying footwear under $40, or
boots under $100, something has to give. The quality will be poor
enough that it likely will fall apart fast. In the long run, people
often spend more replacing cheap footwear than they would by buying
one decent pair. If you're on a budget, you're better off getting a
used pair of higher-quality boots than a brand new $40 pair."When
cheap materials fail, you pay for it twice: once when the shoe breaks
and again when you replace it."People sometimes argue that spending
more is just about fashion or image, but footwear really is a tool.
Shoes are the equipment that get you from point A to point B, that
keep you working, and that carry all of your body weight every day.
When cheap materials fail, you pay for it twice: once when the shoe
breaks and again when you replace it. Better materials may cost more
upfront, but they save you money, time, and frustration.How it
changed the way I buyGood shoes balance health, quality, story, and
style. You wear them every day. Shoes are the one thing separating
you from the ground. All of your weight rests on them. That means
materials matter."I want to support brands that still care about
craft, not the ones that have been bought and sold until they're just
a shadow of what they were."As a consumer, I've become picky with my
choice of shoes. I want to support brands that still care about
craft, not the ones that have been bought and sold until they're just
a shadow of what they were. I like finding footwear with a story
behind it. It becomes a conversation piece, and it makes the
experience of wearing them more enjoyable.This industrial CT scan of
a Japanese M98 boot from World War II reveals its internal stitching,
layers, and sole construction without needing to cut it in half.I've
also changed for health reasons. Barefoot shoes, wide toe boxes, zero
drop are all design choices that make you realize that shoes should
actually be shaped like feet. Once you wear wider shoes for a while,
putting on a narrow pair feels terrible.We spend all this time
worrying about posture in chairs. Shoes deserve at least as much
attention. They're the foundation for our movement through the world.
 
Recall Roundup
Parts Under Pressure
 
Recall Roundup
Stored Energy Meets Soft Spots
 
From The Floor
The Missing Middle in Battery Manufacturing
When I talk with small businesses, startups, and big OEMs working on
batteries, I hear the same story. On one side, there are labs making
tens of cells by hand in glove boxes, with careful notes and plenty
of craft. That effort can signal feasibility but rarely convinces a
VP or investor who needs scalability and repeatability. On the other
side, there are lines turning out tens of thousands of cells a day,
locked to one product and one recipe. They won't pause so a small
program can run a few hundred cells of five slight variants. The
useful ground in the middle is missing. Teams need a way to make
hundreds of consistent cells quickly, trace exactly what went into
them, and repeat runs after tweaking a single variable. Right now
that means bending someone else's operation out of shape and learning
with thin evidence. The team at the Carolina Institute for Battery
Innovation (CIBI) at the University of South Carolina (USC)
discovered this through open discussions with people across the
battery landscape as well as surveys of possible users and other
universities and contract facilities. Some universities cover parts
of the need but are oversubscribed. Contract plants excel once you
know exactly what you want, but they aren't built for the early,
messy questions. This leads to projects leaping from coin cells to
full production assumptions, then stalling when real-cell behavior
diverges. By the time teams chase large-scale capacity, they've often
already made costly decisions on ambiguous data. Cylindrical cells
set for small pack integration and testing in Prof. Austin Downey's
lab at the University of South Carolina. What engineers actually need
When a team asks for a pilot run, they don't want (or need) a mini
gigafactory. They want to keep most variables steady, change only one
knob, and walk away with data they can defend in a room where people
can say no. They want their engineers on the floor next to ours so
the learning isn't third-hand. They want cells and datasets to travel
together so that six months later, a voltage plateau or rise in
impedance still maps to a specific weld head, slurry lot, or dry-room
dew point. Trust comes from pragmatic traceability. No one needs a
full battery passport for early R&D. They need to record which
coating lot ran on which web, the calendaring target, the weld-head
parameters, and the formation protocol. That's enough metadata to
explain performance, but not so much that analysis becomes the job.
Format choice matters. Five- to ten-amp-hour pouch cells expose
thermal and mechanical realities without the risk profile of very
large cells. Tabs, seals, and stack pressure behave like they do in
production, but a mistake won't shut down the line for a month. From
there, many programs step to 18650 or 21700: big enough to matter,
small enough to manage, and aligned with industry direction. Dr.
Shichen Sun in Prof. Kevin Huang's lab analyzing new characterization
data. Victoria Colon-Laborde and Kyra Barton in Prof. Goli
Jalilvand's lab inspecting punched components for making coin cells
for proof-of-concept tests with a partner. Ms. Belinda Agamah in
Prof. William Mustain's lab punching electrodes for Si-anode battery
testing. Constraints that shape the work University lines can log
data around the clock, but when you're changing recipes daily, a full
MES only slows you down. As we are building the capabilities in CIBI,
we are mindful to stay at the pre-A/A level of technology validation,
not mass-production PPAP, so our quality system matches our intent.
We will barcode every cell and record only the critical variables
like coating lot, calendaring target, weld parameters, formation
profile. That way, we will always know what changed without drowning
in metadata. Metrology earns its place: if a measurement doesn't
alter a decision, we won't collect it. That lean traceability drives
our turn to X-ray CT. Rather than scan every cell, we ask early
experiments where CT delivers the biggest payoff--post-stack
alignment, weld-head integrity, or post-formation defects--and then
deploy it as a decision lever. CT reveals subsurface voids,
misalignment, or coating delamination that electrical tests alone
can't catch. By targeting scans where they expose hidden failure
modes, we turn images into same-day adjustments and avoid metrology
for its own sake. Good data plumbing ties it all together: every plot
still maps to a coating lot, web ID, or formation profile without
detective work. Where teams stumble Most early projects succeed or
fail on materials integration. A partner ships a new powder or
separator. You mix, coat, dry, calendar, and slit. Everything looks
fine--until a weld or seal reveals a sensitivity invisible in coin
cells. A powder that behaves well in small batches may fail when
exposed to production solvents, drying curves, or pressure. A
separator tolerant of one weld energy may buckle at another. Small
process changes can break lifetime. Running mixing - coating - drying
- calendaring - slitting - assembly - welding - sealing - formation
as a coherent sequence surfaces those sensitivities quickly and in
context. If a dataset flags a high tab-weld void rate correlating to
rising formation resistance, you adjust the weld head that day--not
debate slides weeks later. Data trips teams up too. Spreadsheets
multiply, copies diverge, and folders labeled "final" fill with
versions. Months later, no one can reproduce the figure that
justified the next phase. Design for the human who reviews the data:
decide what to collect, make it mandatory, and keep it close to the
work. The aim isn't pretty dashboards; it's a clear decision someone
can trust. Assembling samples for structural battery testing in Prof.
Ralph White's lab. A practical pilot, not a mini-factory There is
real demand for a trusted middle ground. Some academics excel at
mechanism studies and new materials--work that happens in my research
lab and those around USC, which I respect deeply. But, as we are
building CIBI, we are drawn to what happens in real cells under real
operating conditions, and to building teams and infrastructure so
more people can do that work well. We are standing up a pilot line in
the Southeast United States for that middle ground. We'll begin with
5-10 Ah pouch cells (operational in Q4 2026) because that's where
demand is strongest and where we learn fastest without splitting
focus. Tabs, seals, and thermal behavior reveal themselves early
enough to guide changes with manageable risk. About 6 months later,
we will bring production of 21700 cylindrical cells online. That
sequence reflects input from safety consortia, internal experience,
and government R&D programs. 21700 hits a Goldilocks zone--large
enough for meaningful energy-density and thermal studies, small
enough to avoid the safety and capital burdens of very large formats.
Wide view of students and postdoc's in Prof. Goli Jalilvand's lab.
Includes pouch cell assembly, using the in-situ Raman and preparing
samples for various testing. Three Engagement Patterns Make to
recipe. You provide a bill of materials and process windows. We will
assemble, form, and test to spec, then return finished cells and a
clean dataset. Think of it as "make 300 cells with this conductive
cathode additive exactly as written." The value lies not in the
machine list, but in data and cells that agree and can be defended.
Design of experiments. We codevelop a matrix--say, anode additive vs.
multiple electrolytes--execute builds, handle formation and testing,
and deliver results in a format your analysis stack ingests. The aim
is clarity: if an additive works only at certain solvent ratios, you
see it on one page, not buried across files. Longer R&D partnerships.
Over a semester we plan three or four build cycles, layer in physical
characterization and failure analysis, and coauthor decisions that
turn ideas into IP. This is where CT, cross-sections, and simple
mechanical tests converge. A weld fix shows up in resistance data and
images, not just in meeting minutes. For data stewardship, we
formalize capture, curation, and handoff so results stay useful
across iterations. Engagements run days to weeks. Engineers work side
by side in the assembly process. Our target remains pre-A and A cells
for technology validation. Every cell gets a barcode. Lots and
critical settings are tracked. We define capture, curation, and
handoff up front so that months later, explanations still link
performance back to process variables. If this middle ground sounds
familiar, bring your engineers and open questions. We'll bring a line
built for learning and the discipline to keep evidence clean. What
motivates the CIBI faculty and staff is being the trusted partner
that moves ideas out of the glove box and into real cells. It is
gratifying to see a company come in with a hunch and leave with
evidence they can act on. Rendering by designers at Little
Diversified Architectural Consulting in North Charleston, SC of Phase
2 of the Carolina Institute of Battery Innovation (CIBI), planned for
2028. CIBI's vision is to become a collaborative ecosystem with
university and industry researchers, with 100,000 sq ft. of dedicated
battery space, pilot manufacturing for pouch, cylindrical, and
prismatic formats, a world-class battery safety lab, and a large
battery cycling/performance lab.
 
From The Floor
The Secret to Better Running Shoes? CT Scanning
When it comes to running, comfort is king. A shoe that doesn't fit
just right--whether it's too tight, too loose, or blister-inducing--can
mean the difference between a personal best and a painful run. But
creating a shoe that delivers comfort, durability, and performance at
scale is a challenge when so much of its structure is hidden from
view.For Luca Ciccone, Director of Product Engineering at Saucony,
understanding a shoe's structure has always been as important as its
materials. Industrial CT presented a new way to do just that--offering
insights that traditional inspection methods simply couldn't. When
Saucony began working with Lumafield's Neptune CT scanner, it quickly
became an essential tool in their development process. Now, their
engineers can examine every layer of a shoe without cutting it apart,
allowing them to spot hidden flaws, ensure consistency, and fine-tune
designs before they ever hit the production line.CT scanning isn't
just for elite racing shoes; it's a tool that improves footwear for
every kind of runner. That's why we sat down with Luca to take a look
inside a comprehensive range of Saucony's shoes, from the Omni 9, a
stability-focused trainer for everyday wear, to the Ride 18, a
cushioned workhorse built for long miles, and the Endorphin Elite 2,
an elite marathon racing shoe.Comfort vs. PerformanceTo engineer a
comfortable shoe, designers have to thread the needle between a
reliable hard good and a comfortable soft good. That means looking at
more than just materials and construction methods--it requires a deep
understanding of how every individual component interacts with the
rest of the shoe.Being able to see the CT scan and digitally cut the
shoe in half to look at each one of the components and how everything
came together, we can truly understand the consistency that we're
getting in our R&D phases, all the way up into production.That
insight is crucial when working with intricate, multi-layered
products like running shoes. Even a small misalignment--like a heel
counter being placed slightly off-center--can change the way a shoe
fits and feels. And because runners expect every pair to feel the
same, maintaining consistency is just as important as getting the
initial design right."If it's misaligned in any way, shape, or form,
it can truly affect the comfort of the shoe and how it can perform,"
Ciccone explained. "We want to make sure that we're minimizing these
risks upfront."Saucony's Omni 9While the Omni 9 may look like a
casual, fashion-forward sneaker, there's a surprising amount of
engineering beneath the surface. The shoe is designed to provide both
comfort and stability, but that balance depends on careful placement
of key internal components.One of the most important of these is the
heel counter--a rigid insert that helps lock the foot in place.
Because it sits inside the shoe's upper, it's impossible to inspect
without cutting the shoe open--unless you use CT scanning."The first
thing that I look at when I look at a CT scan of this particular
shoe... is where the heel counter is being placed on the inside of the
upper," Ciccone notes. "You cannot see it from the outside, and the
only way that you're able to look at it is by cutting it in
half."With CT scanning, Saucony can go beyond simply verifying
placement. Engineers can measure its exact position, assess alignment
across different production batches, and ensure it maintains its
shape under stress. This level of detail helps eliminate
inconsistencies before they become comfort or performance issues,
keeping every pair true to its intended design.Saucony's Ride 18A
great running shoe isn't just comfortable on the first run--it has to
feel just as good after hundreds of miles. That's why the Ride 18 was
designed with durability in mind. But materials alone aren't enough
to guarantee longevity; the way they're assembled matters just as
much.Sometimes, issues don't appear right away. A runner might wear a
pair of shoes for weeks before noticing that a certain spot feels
less cushioned than it used to. These breakdowns are often caused by
inconsistencies in glue application, foam density, or structural
bonding--issues that aren't visible from the outside.If you're able to
look at all of your products throughout testing, you can simply see
where those breakdowns occur, and you're able to fix the design down
the road.Saucony's Endorphin Elite 2Saucony's brand-new Endorphin
Elite 2 is built for speed, and its performance hinges on the precise
interaction of multiple components. At the heart of the shoe is a
carbon-fiber plate sandwiched between layers of PWRRUN PB foam. This
plate helps propel runners forward, but only if it's positioned
perfectly.Our scan of the Endorphin Elite 2 shows the way the foam
and carbon plate have been bonded together. If there were any air
pockets, inconsistencies, or shifts in placement, they would be
visible in the scan--allowing the team to refine the process before
production.CT scanning lets Saucony detect potential weak points
before a shoe ever reaches a runner's feet. By analyzing the bonding
between the midsole and upper, the adhesion of different materials,
and the uniformity of the foam, engineers can make adjustments that
prevent premature wear and tear.The Future of FootwearCT scanning
isn't just a tool for defect detection--it's a new way of thinking
about product development. For Saucony, that means fewer prototypes,
more reliable manufacturing, and better-performing shoes. Instead of
relying on assumptions and best guesses, the team can use real-world
data to make informed decisions at every stage of the design
process.As engineers, we always strive to make our products better.
Being able to look inside our shoes without cutting them apart--that's
a game-changer.From stability-focused trainers to elite racing
shoes, every model in Saucony's lineup benefits from precise,
data-driven engineering. And thanks to Lumafield's CT scanning
technology, that engineering is more accurate, efficient, and
effective than ever before.
 
Recall Roundup
Tolerance Tested
This month's recalls cut across a cross-section of everyday use.
Spanning everything from batteries and bikes to children's products
and vehicles, the volume of recalls this month makes patterns easier
to see. Read as a whole, the list reveals familiar failure modes
under ordinary conditions where thermal margin disappears in tight
packaging, interfaces shoulder more load than the spec anticipates,
and small components drift out of tolerance and undermine system
performance. Packed cells, thin margins November's battery recalls
span devices of every size. Belkin pulled portable power banks and
wireless charging stands for pack overheating, about 83,500 units in
the United States and 2,385 in Canada. Knog recalled bicycle lights
for the same hazard at roughly 3,790 units. Overheating can start
with variation in cell quality, defects introduced during cell or
pack assembly, weak battery management systems, or integration
choices that leave the pack without a clear thermal path. These
products live in pockets, on nightstands, and on handlebars, so a
single fault can turn into fire or toxic smoke in occupied space.
Mechanisms on the move Mechanical limits surfaced in everyday gear,
and the modes were not subtle. Lezyne bicycle floor pumps, about
7,500 in the United States and 680 in Canada, can launch the canister
from its base under pressure, putting users and bystanders in the
flight path. Spartan riding mowers leave room for steering arm
dampers to be installed the wrong way on about 650 machines, a setup
that produces bounce and loss of control. STIHL's BR 800 backpack
blowers add a rotating failure with fan wheels that can break apart
on about 47,800 units and cause lacerations. The throughline is a
single dependency at the point of action where a modest interface
decides whether force is guided or let loose. Saddles under stress
Peloton's Original Series Bike+ returned to a familiar stress path.
The seat post assembly can fracture under load, and about 833,000
bikes are included. In 2023, Peloton recalled the original Bike for
the same basic failure mode, a larger campaign that covered roughly
2.2 million units. Taken together, the two actions show how repeated,
off-axis riding loads concentrate at the saddle and post, and how
small margins at that interface can scale into very large field
populations. Tolerances for tiny users Child-focused recalls centered
on restraint, retention, and access in ordinary play. AliExpress's
convertible strollers violated the stroller standard when the
restraint system can fail. Only about 15 units are involved, yet
child safety is judged by quality, not scale. Little Partners' Grow
'N Stow folding learning tower reported platforms that can collapse
across about 9,780 units. Konges Slojd's three-wheeled scooters can
lose the left front wheel on roughly 50 units and turn balance into a
sudden drop. Two toys raise ingestion and choking hazards, including
Bettina doll sets that expose button cells on about 380 sets and
Inkari plush alpaca toys for under-three use with eyes that can
detach on about 64,000 units. Across these cases, safety depends on
restraints, platforms, wheels, and small parts that remain secure
through real handling rather than only in ideal tests. Strain on
simple things Several household goods looked simple but carried real
hazards. F&F Fine Wines recalled Kirkland Signature Valdobbiadene
Prosecco DOCG for bottles that can break or shatter, about 941,400
bottles. H-E-B's 12-pack Destination Holiday Glow bracelets include a
green stick that can leak an irritant liquid, about 6,600 packs.
Kroger's Halloween-themed skeleton candles include flammable
ornaments, about 3,680 units. Risk tracks variation, not complexity.
Glass under pressure demands uniform walls, sealed chemistries depend
on clean continuous bonds, and anything near a flame must use
materials that do not ignite. Small failures, big consequences On the
automotive side, recent recall campaigns focus on fuel containment,
traction batteries, and braking electronics. Hyundai's 2020-2023
Sonata and Kia's 2021-2024 K5 cite a damaged check valve that can let
air into the fuel tank, allow it to expand against hot exhaust
components, and ultimately melt. Ford's 2020-2024 Escape PHEV and
2021-2024 Lincoln Corsair PHEV list manufacturing defects in
high-voltage cells that can short and fail. A separate action for
certain 2025 Maverick and Escape vehicles points to an electric brake
booster ECU cover that can overheat the circuit board and disable
ABS, electronic stability control, traction control, or brake assist.
Small parts carry big consequences on the road, and a single faulty
valve, cell, or cover can put everyone nearby at risk. Takeaways
November underscores that reliability lives at interfaces. Thermal
margin around cells and chargers determines how quietly products age.
Small joints carry outsized safety loads, from coaster hubs and pump
canisters to seat posts and fan wheels. In children's products,
batteries and small parts must remain inaccessible after real wear,
not just on day one. In vehicles and large systems, modest components
shape outcomes for many people at once. The mix this month also shows
that scale does not track complexity. A simple interface repeated
across a product family can create a very large field count, while a
small run in child gear still matters because the harm is
concentrated. The pattern is consistent across categories and it
points to the same place: the ordinary connections that decide how
products behave when they leave the bench.
 
Recall Roundup
Too Hot, Too Sharp, Too Loose
 
Design to Reality
What Are Counterfeit Batteries?
18650 lithium-ion batteries are among the most common in the world.
Their wound design and standard form factor makes them fast and
economical to produce at scale, with around 5 billion being
manufactured every year. But the popularity and standardization of
these cells creates an opportunity for bad actors to capitalize on
the quality efforts of reputable manufacturers.Counterfeit 18650
cells move through fast-moving marketplaces where listings turn over
quickly and a convincing external wrap substitutes for provenance.
18650s generally all look the same on the outside, given their
defined can size of 18 mm by 65 mm. The truth, however, lies within,
where the jelly roll reveals dangerous shortcuts.Counterfeit
Technique 1: ImpersonationThe clearest counterfeiting comes from
direct impersonation. Some 18650 products copy a specific, reputable
model in name, appearance, and positioning. In our Battery Quality
Report, we examined cells from Amazon vendor SOOCOOL that closely
mimicked the appearance of Samsung's 30Q 18650 product. The cells
were wrapped in a strikingly similar pink color, and featured similar
printed warnings advising against use in vaping devices. The listing
title "Authentic 30QP Rechargeable 3.7 V 18650 Battery Flat Top, Real
3000mAh(2PCS, with Free Plastic Case)," also clearly leaned into the
Samsung 30Q identity, and they were priced at a premium, costing more
than the actual Samsung batteries but available on the more
convenient platform of Amazon. This particular listing has since been
removed, but countless others can still be found.The Amazon listing
for the counterfeit 30Q cells from SOOCOOL. The listing has since
been removed.Initially, the batteries also seem to perform similarly
to the real Samsungs, their measured capacities landing in the same
neighborhoods. However, our industrial X-ray CT scans told a
different story. Anode overhang, which should sit near 0.5 mm to
maintain a safety margin as the cell ages, came up short in several
cells, with one sample even showing negative anode overhang.
Insufficient anode overhang is a defect that can meaningfully
contribute to uneven lithium plating, which in turn can result in
performance problems and even internal shorts down the line. The edge
alignment of the SOOCOOL cells also deviated wildly. Anode and
cathode layers should be as straight as possible in a wound
lithium-ion battery, and the wavy patterns of the SOOCOOL batteries
indicate poor manufacturing process controls. The quality concerns
that the CT scans surface confirm these cells are counterfeits.The
color of the counterfeit cell is an obvious imitation of the actual
Samsung.Counterfeit Technique 2: MisrepresentationLow-cost cells that
print impossible specifications engage in a different kind of
misrepresentation. Two brands in the set scanned for the Battery
Quality Report, Benkia and Maxiaeon, had "9900 mAh" printed on their
wraps, a physically impossible figure for the form factor. The
measured capacity for the both brands sat around 1200 mAh, and the
scans showed why. Large portions of the interior had little or no
active material. These cells do not impersonate a particular brand,
but they inflate performance claims beyond plausibility. Packs
designed around those claims will deliver less energy and age
unpredictably because the interior cannot support the promise on the
label.Comparison of an authentic cell, a counterfeit cell, and a
misrepresented low-cost cell.A Gray Area: RewrappingSeparate from
these two groups are rewrapped batteries. In most cases they begin as
legitimate OEM cells that have been relabeled for distribution under
a new brand. Many perform as expected because the core cell was
designed and built by a competent manufacturer. But risk comes from
uncertainty about the exact source. Rewraps can include surplus lots,
cells that failed OEM QA, or units that were disassembled from larger
salvaged battery packs. The new wrap hides that history, so the
question becomes not whether rewraps are inherently poor, but whether
any given batch matches the underlying standard. In our scans,
several rewraps generally mirrored mainstream OEM geometry, though
the anode overhang distributions were not as tight. One of the three
rewrap brands we scanned was also markedly worse than the other two,
illustrating the variability rewrapping can hide, though even the
worst rewrap cells were still much higher quality than the low-cost/
counterfeit cells. Population behavior separates these groups more
cleanly than any single measurement. The SOOCOOL set scattered more
broadly and stood well apart from genuine Samsung samples, even
though some individual cells looked acceptable in isolation. The
spec-inflated low-cost brands had the widest distributions,
indicating exceptionally poor process controls. Rewraps generally
clustered tighter, with outliers that reflected the uncertainty of
source rather than a systematic departure from good
practice. Distribution of median and minimum anode overhang
measurements per cell.Can you trust the batteries you're buying?
Validating 18650 supply is essential because these cells are then
buried into larger electronic assemblies. With numerous potentially
problematic cells clustered in hard-to-access areas of devices,
failures become hard to identify and address. Unfortunately current
oversight of lithium-ion batteries is insufficient, focusing on
hazardous material content, shipping standards, and coin-cell child
safety. All are important, but battery quality is going largely
untraced. The enormous size of the market makes it easy to hide
gray-market activity. Questionable vendors can vanish and reappear
under new listings when problems arise, as we saw
firsthand.Counterfeits and dubious claims will continue to circulate
as long as batteries remain ubiquitous and profitable, and they
flourish in the gaps left by limited oversight. That reality makes it
all the more important to recognize that every can is not created
equal. When billions of cells enter the market each year, some will
carry the design discipline of a reputable manufacturer and others
the shortcuts of a dishonest one. Understanding the difference is not
just about calling out bad actors, but about seeing how trust in the
battery supply is built (or eroded) one cell at a time.
 
The Quality Gap
What Went Wrong Inside These Recalled Power Banks?
Lithium-ion batteries power the many electronic devices that we rely
on every day, from EVs to smartphones and laptops. They're so
prevalent, that the average American owns nine lithium
battery-powered devices.1 But they carry real risks when quality
lapses occur. Overheating and fire hazards can cause property damage,
injuries, or worse. With millions of these batteries in circulation,
even a single defect can have a ripple effect of consequences for
consumer safety and brand reputation. Recently, Anker recalled over
one million PowerCore 10000 power banks, model A1263, produced
between 2016 and 2019 and sold through 2022.2,3 Anker has provided a
general warning that the lithium-ion battery can overheat, but they
have yet to share the exact reason for the recall. Armed with our
Neptune Industrial CT Scanner and five A1263 power banks from
Lumafield team members, we set out to see if we could identify the
source of this recall. Could we identify the defects with CT
scanning? And could CT inspection during development or manufacturing
have prevented the faulty power banks from shipping in the first
place?Scanning SetupWe procured five potentially-affected power banks
from various Lumafield colleagues, which we labelled PB1, PB2, PB3,
PB4, and PB5. We then ran the serial numbers against Anker's recall
form, and determined that three of our power banks were impacted,
while two were not.The power banks were scanned using Lumafield's
Microfocus Neptune. This configuration's small X-ray spot size makes
it the ideal tool for resolving fine details in electronics and
batteries.4Use the embedded Voyager window below to explore the CT
scan of the recalled power bank. Rotate and examine it from any
angle.First Look: Battery CellsThe first element we compared across
the power banks were the battery cells themselves. A lithium-ion
battery consists of two separated electrodes. The anode, usually
graphite, stores lithium ions during charging. The cathode, typically
a layered metal oxide, releases and accepts lithium ions as they move
through the electrolyte during charge and discharge, enabling
reversible energy storage.There are a few common defects in the
battery manufacturing process that can be easily spotted in a CT
scan. For example, in lithium-ion batteries, it's important to ensure
that the anode has a sufficient overhang above the cathode,
preventing the lithium plating that can lead to dendrite formation.5
Dendrites can subsequently result in degraded performance and short
circuits, which can cause the worst-case scenarios of thermal
runaway. CT scanning can also be used for Foreign Object Detection
(FOD) within batteries, as particle contamination can lead to reduced
performance and potentially short circuits.The A1263 power banks each
contain three 18650 lithium-ion battery cells inside. It was quickly
apparent that batteries from at least two different suppliers had
been used within the affected power banks. The cells in PB1
(recalled), PB2 (recalled), PB4 (not recalled), and PB5 (not
recalled) seemed similar, but the cells in PB3 (recalled) had a few
key differences. First, the batteries in PB3 have a mandrel to help
prevent core collapse, a type of deformation in lithium-ion batteries
with "jelly roll" construction where the innermost layers can sag
into the center.6 Mandrels can also serve as a pathway for gas escape
in case of overpressurization. Some suppliers add a center tube to
strengthen the core and prevent this from happening. Though none of
the batteries in the five power banks we scanned seem to show core
collapse, only PB3 has reinforcement material to combat this
potential issue.On the left cell, from PB3, reinforcement foil
appears as bright, dense material around the battery's center. This
is noticeably absent from the right cell, from PB1. The other
discrepancy in the PB3 batteries is the number and style of vent
openings. PB1, PB2, PB4, and PB5 have four smaller openings at the
positive terminal, while the PB3 cells have three larger ones. This
further suggests that the batteries in PB3 come from a different
source.In the left image, we observe 3 vent openings from a cell in
PB3. In the right image we see the four vent openings common across
the cells in PB1, PB2, PB4, and PB5. If the recall is affecting units
made with 18650 battery cells from multiple suppliers, that suggests
the root cause of the recall stems from elsewhere in the power bank.
We next focused on the PCB and assembly of the board with the
cells.Assembly Discrepancies Looking at the assembly of the A1263
power banks, one difference between the recalled and non-recalled
devices stood out immediately. All five power banks used tab bus bars
to connect the positive and negative terminals of the 18650 cells.
However, the non-recalled PB4 and PB5 devices used conventional
insulated wires to make the positive and negative connections to the
PCB, while the recalled PB1, PB2, and PB3 power banks used flat tab
wire for the entirety of the connection.On the left image of PB4,
thin insulated wires are clearly visible. On the right image of PB2,
wide thin tabs are used for the connections instead.A closer look at
the connections between the cells and PCB in PB4 (left) and PB2
(right).Looking more closely at the connections of PB1, PB2, and PB3,
we see some process variation that could be a potential cause for
concern. The shape of the negative tab differs dramatically, and in
PB1 it appears slightly twisted. From left to right, the negative tab
crossing above the positive tab - PB1, PB2, PB3.We can measure the
distance to quantify how dramatically the gap between the positive
and negative bus bars varies across the three units. In PB1, that
distance is only 0.52 mm, compared to 1.12 mm in PB2 and 1.58 mm in
PB3. The short distance and visible deformation in PB3 suggests the
possibility of the negative bus bar shorting out against the positive
bus in some scenarios.From left to right, measurements of the space
between the negative and positive tabs for PB1, PB2, and PB3.Evolving
Power Bank DesignIn addition to the recalled power bank, we scanned
Anker's current PowerCore 10000 model, the Anker 313. This model was
first released in January 2023. The exterior of the power bank has
changed significantly. At 5.87 in by 2.68 in by 0.55 in,7 compared to
the A1263's dimensions of 3.62 in by 2.36 in by 0.87 in,8 the 10K
product has become longer and wider, but also noticeably
thinner. Looking inside, we find this slimming has been accomplished
by replacing the three 18650 cylindrical cells with a single
lithium-ion pouch cell. With 90-95% packaging efficiency, pouch cells
are maximally compact relative to other battery cell designs and can
be customized to accommodate different industrial design
requirements.9 The single-cell configuration of the Anker 313
simplifies the assembly required. We also see that significant
changes have been made to the embedded electronics, as is to be
expected given both the new product architecture and the general
advances in PCB manufacturing since the A1263 was manufactured.CT
scan of the updated Anker PowerCore 10000, showing the single
lithium-ion pouch cell and a slice of its PCBA.ConclusionCT scanning
the A1263 Anker PowerCore 10000 power banks has provided a small
window into the supply chain complexity of these pervasive,
ostensibly simple products. This SKU was manufactured over a period
of 3 years and 10 months, and sold for over six and a half years.
From our limited analysis of just five power banks, a small subset of
the millions of devices sold, we have identified that throughout the
A1263 production period at least two battery cell versions and two
battery connector designs were used. A larger sample size would
likely reveal further variations. Managing a high-volume battery
supply chain is inherently challenging, and ensuring quality
throughout each stage is essential. Only Anker can know for sure why
these popular consumer devices have warranted a recall three years
after they were last sold. However, though we don't know exactly what
flaw triggered this massive recall, it illustrates just how costly
quality issues can be. The volumes involved in these types of
consumer products can be staggering, and it can be extraordinarily
difficult to track quality issues all the way upstream. Since we
began this exploration, Anker has issued a new recall for five
additional power bank models: Anker Power Bank models A1257 and
A1647, Anker MagGo Power Bank model A1652, and Anker Zolo Power Bank
models A1681 and A1689.10 Unlike the A1263 Anker PowerCore 10000
power banks, these are more recent products. Anker has shared that
the recall was caused by potential issues with one of their battery
suppliers. Their English announcement credits the more rigorous
quality processes they implemented earlier this year with catching
the cause for concern,11 while announcements in China by Anker and
competitor ROMOSS Technology disclosed that the cell supplier in
question made an undisclosed change in the raw materials used, which
could lead to insulation degradation.12 Anker has recalled 710,00
units from those models in China, and the global numbers have yet to
be disclosed. Looking just at the recall of A1263 Anker PowerCore
10000 power banks sold between 2016 and 2022, about 1,158,000 units
have been affected. Impacted users will receive either a replacement
unit or a $30 Anker Store gift card, implying a financial exposure of
over $34 million, not including other relevant recall-related costs.
Beyond the immediate economic impact, battery recalls can cause
permanent reputational damage that proves impossible to quantify in
the long term. Anker has underscored their commitment to better
quality assurance processes and signed an agreement with a new
battery vendor13 as they work to regain the trust of their
customers.Industrial CT inspection offers a powerful tool that can
help ensure the safety of the many battery products that surround us.
It can be leveraged during the design and development stages to
validate designs and brought into the manufacturing ramp-up to
support First Article Inspection and validate assembly processes. In
production, it can non-destructively verify quality, both upstream
and downstream. And after parts have shipped, CT scanning can be used
to support faster failure analysis as issues arise in the field.
Ultimately, ensuring the reliability of lithium-ion battery products
is becoming more critical than ever, as these devices become
increasingly embedded in our daily lives. As CT inspection becomes
more accessible and easier to adopt, it can serve as a safeguard of
both consumer safety and manufacturers' bottom lines.
 
The Quality Gap
What's Hiding Inside Haribo's Power Bank and Headphones?
 
The Quality Gap
What's Inside Your Water Filter? A CT Scan Comparison
Water filters are our silent guardians, protecting us from a whole
host of invisible contaminants. But what's happening inside them as
they work tirelessly to deliver clean water? With industrial CT
scanning, we can take a detailed look at the internal structure of
water filters--before and after use--to uncover how they perform, age,
and ultimately safeguard our health.In this deep dive, we'll explore
four types of water filters: pitcher filters, refrigerator water
filters, reverse osmosis filters, and the LifeStraw. By getting to
know their inner workings, we can see how each design contributes to
its effectiveness and how they handle the wear and tear of daily
use.Pitcher Water FiltersPitcher filters are household staples, using
a blend of activated carbon and ion-exchange resin to trap impurities
such as chlorine, sediment, and heavy metals like lead. When water
passes through, the carbon absorbs contaminants, while the resin
removes specific ions to improve taste and safety. Type image caption
here (optional)A CT scan of a new pitcher filter reveals a porous,
uniform core of activated carbon and resin. The material's
consistency ensures even water filtration throughout the cartridge.
After use, however, the scan tells a different story. Clearly-defined
flow channels are visible, suggesting that water is following the
same path through the filter media each time, limiting the
thoroughness of filtration. The once-pristine pores are partially
blocked by accumulated sediment and impurities, and denser particles
have migrated to the outer edges of the core--indicators that
consistent, uniform filtration is a thing of the past for this
particular filter.Refrigerator Water FiltersRefrigerator water
filters deliver clean water for drinking and ice, and we barely
notice them because they are directly connected to a water line.
These filters rely on dense activated carbon cores enclosed within
sturdy plastic shells.In a new refrigerator filter, CT highlights the
robust, porous structure of the carbon core. This setup is ideal for
trapping particles, chlorine, and even some volatile organic
compounds. Over time, as the filter absorbs these impurities, the
core grows noticeably denser as the filter absorbs contaminants day
in and day out. Initially, the plastic casing was the densest
element, but after months of use, the filtration media becomes
markedly denser than the outer shell. Reverse Osmosis Water
FiltersReverse osmosis filters take water purification to the next
level, using a semi-permeable membrane composed of tightly wound
layers of synthetic material. These layers create microscopic pores
that allow water molecules to pass through while blocking
contaminants like salts, minerals, and chemicals. The membrane is
often supported by a mesh or fabric backing and enclosed in a
cylindrical housing for durability and ease of installation. Reverse
osmosis systems are the go-to for ultra-clean water.We worked with
the GEAR Lab at MIT to compare new vs. used reverse osmosis elements.
Our scan of a new reverse osmosis filter looks almost like a
lithium-ion battery, with delicate but uniform layers surrounding a
columnar core. Water has a pathway, impeded as it should be only by
the membrane's mesh pores. The filter worked 12 hours on, 12 hours
off, for two months, then we scanned it again. Having purified a hard
water supply high in mineral content, the filter now displays scars
of its valiant efforts. Scaling deposits of minerals and organic
matter visibly clog the layers, restricting water flow and reducing
filtration efficiency.LifeStrawThe LifeStraw is a portable, personal
water filter designed for outdoor adventures, travel in areas with
unreliable water quality, and emergency preparedness. Unlike reverse
osmosis, which relies on a semi-permeable membrane to remove
dissolved solids, the LifeStraw uses hollow fiber membranes with
microscopic pores to physically block contaminants like bacteria,
parasites, and microplastics. This ensures clean drinking water on
the go, without requiring electricity or extensive setup, making it
ideal for hikers, campers, and those in disaster relief situations.A
CT scan of a new LifeStraw reveals its uniform, open hollow fibers,
which allow water to flow freely while trapping harmful particles
along the way. Over time, and with frequent use, these fibers near
the inlet begin to clog as debris accumulates, reducing both flow
efficiency and the safety of the water that passes through. That
makes regular cleaning a must for maintaining the performance of
LifeStraw in challenging environments.Filtration for the
FutureIndustrial CT offers a new level of transparency into the
performance and lifespan of water filters. For consumers, it provides
valuable insights into the unseen changes filters undergo, helping
them make informed decisions about when to replace a filter to
maintain the highest water quality. It removes the guesswork, letting
us see the tangible effects of contaminants and wear over time.For
manufacturers, CT scanning unlocks critical opportunities to refine
designs and materials. By understanding exactly how and where
blockages form, they can create filters that are not only more
efficient but also longer-lasting and better suited to the diverse
needs of their customers. Whether it's tweaking carbon density or
optimizing membrane layers, these improvements translate into more
reliable products.Filters are more than just tools--they're protectors
of our health and safety. CT scanning goes beyond the surface,
offering a glimpse into their often overlooked work and paving the
way for smarter designs. With this technology, we're not just looking
at filters; we're transforming how they serve us, ensuring better
water quality today and clearing the way for tomorrow's innovations.
 
Materials World
What's Inside a Battery?
Most of us carry batteries around every day without thinking about
what's inside them. Phones, laptops, and cars all rely on their
power. From the outside they seem simple; inside they're made of
carefully chosen materials that have to work together to provide the
right amount of power. Battery basics The main pieces of a battery
are the anode, the cathode, a separator, and an electrolyte. Cathode
materials have shifted over the years. They used to be lithium cobalt
oxide or lithium manganese oxide, though those are mostly phased out.
Today you'll see acronyms like LFP (lithium iron phosphate) and NMC
(nickel, manganese, cobalt). Each mix has different strengths: some
give higher energy density, others last longer, or are a bit more
stable and safer. Anodes are usually graphite spread onto copper
foil. The electrolyte is what lets lithium ions move between the
anode and cathode. It is often a liquid solvent, which can be
flammable; there are also versions that use a polymer instead. Those
can improve safety and sometimes performance. Separators are thin
polymers that keep the anode and cathode from touching. Solid-state
batteries go further by using solid electrolytes, though they are
still in development. Making a battery is not just stacking parts
together. Powders like graphite or lithium compounds are mixed into a
binder and coated onto thin foils. How evenly that coating spreads
affects how it dries and how it compresses later. The tricky part is
that every material behaves differently. You cannot simply swap one
formulation for another and expect the process to work; each one
needs its own set of parameters, which means testing, adjusting, and
running trials until it works consistently. Competing priorities
Every choice in battery design comes with trade-offs. Cost is always
a factor; if a battery is too expensive, it will not make it to
market. Safety is another non-negotiable. Failures can lead to
recalls or worse. Beyond those, it depends on the application. Some
batteries need the highest possible energy density, like those in
electric cars. Others need long cycle life, like batteries for grid
storage. Engineers weigh performance factors such as energy,
lifespan, safety, and affordability against what the end product
requires. Supply chain and recycling Batteries rely on critical
minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, and graphite; each is
sourced from different parts of the world. That makes supply chains
important. Tariffs, import sources, and political shifts all play a
role in availability and cost. Recycling can help, and new processes
are being developed, but it remains complicated. Each battery
chemistry uses a different mix of metals, which makes separating them
difficult. Recycling techniques depend on the physical and chemical
properties of the powders and foils, so a process that works for one
chemistry will not necessarily work for another. There is also the
economic side. Recycling only makes sense if the materials are
valuable enough to recover. Using less expensive materials can reduce
dependence on scarce resources; it can also make recycling less
worthwhile. Finding defects It only takes a small flaw inside a
battery to cause an issue. Historically, anode overhang, where the
anode extends too far past the cathode, has been a primary concern.
Other defects include poor tab welds, wrinkles, or tears in
electrodes. One of the main issues today is foreign particles. Tiny
bits of metal can break off during welding or cutting, or fall in
during assembly; those particles can trigger failures. [Embedded
scan] To catch these problems, you need ways to look inside the
sealed battery. CT scanning is one option, and it can detect very
small particles, even down to a few microns. Ultrasound can also
work, though with lower resolution. Destructive testing is another
method, but it is slow and not practical for every battery that comes
off the line. Balance From the outside, a battery looks simple.
Inside, it is a complex mix of materials, processes, and trade-offs.
Every decision, whether it is choosing LFP over NMC or tweaking how
powders are coated, has ripple effects on performance, cost, safety,
and recyclability. There is no perfect recipe; it is always about
finding the right balance for the job at hand.
 
Scan of the Month
Communications Hardware
What really links orbit to your pocket? From Starlink's phased arrays
to the iPhone Air's hidden antennas, uncover the secret hardware
shaping how the world communicates.
 
Scan of the Month
LEGO Minifigures
You might be surprised by what is hiding inside a LEGO. These CT
Scans show you the engineered perfection in a small, simple plastic
LEGO figurine.
 
Scan of the Month
Nest Evolution
Join Tony Fadell as he uses a CT scanner to take us inside the Nest
Thermostat and uncover the secrets of its inner workings and
revolutionary technology.
 
Scan of the Month
Shaving
From razors to electric shavers and epilators, discover the intricate
engineering behind everyday personal care products.
 
Scan of the Month
iPod Evolution
Over 20 years ago the iPod changed music forever. This month we used
the Lumafield Neptune CT scanner to look inside and see how they did
it.
 
Scan of the Month
Instant Cameras
There's a whole world inside Polaroid Instant Cameras. We're giving
photographers a closer look at the technology inside with a CT
Scanner.
 
Scan of the Month
Golf Equipment
As the US Open tees off, we use our CT scanner to see inside
AI-designed Nike shoes and a pair of clubs that took 20 years to
develop.
 
Scan of the Month
Geometries of Nature
Dive into the hidden complexities of plants and fungi, revealed by
state-of-the-art CT scans. Discover nature's extraordinary
engineering up close!
 
Scan of the Month
Gamepads
Dive into the inner workings of video game controllers. Experience
the innovative journey from simple joysticks to immersive gamepads
using CT scans.
 
Scan of the Month
Game Boy Compendium
There's a whole world inside Game Boys and Nintendo handhelds--take a
look to see the inner workings. Our CT Scanner shows the technology
and design within.
 
Scan of the Month
Food Packaging
Our CT Scanners looked at the packaging of three popular condiments.
See what's inside that iconic green Sriracha bottle cap.
 
Scan of the Month
Car Parts
Discover the explosives packed into an airbag and the impressive
engineering behind a fuel cap, combination switch, and engine piston.
 
Scan of the Month
3D Printing
Look inside four real 3D printed products--including two you might not
know are 3D printed.
 
Scan of the Month
Batteries
Learn how Li-ion and LiPo batteries move so many electrons without
having to open one yourself. Our CT scanner lets you see inside while
staying safe.
 
Scan of the Month
Drug Delivery Devices
Asthma inhalers and EpiPens provide life-saving medicines to millions
of Americans every day. Our CT scanner shows how they work.
 
Scan of the Month
Coffee
Discover the intricacy of Bialetti's Moka Express, the AeroPress, a
Porlex ceramic burr grinder, and the Fellow Stagg EKG kettle.
 
Scan of the Month
AirPods Evolution
There's a whole world inside an Apple AirPod--all packed into a tiny
form factor. Our CT Scanner shows you the tech in each generation's
redesign.
[6893b15575]
Design to RealityDesign to Reality[placeholde]
The Quality GapThe Quality Gap[placeholde]
Go/No-GoGo/No-Go[689d0f8107]
Materials WorldMaterials World[placeholde]
Scan of the MonthScan of the Month[placeholde]
From The FloorFrom The Floor[placeholde]
Recall RoundupRecall Roundup[placeholde]
EventsAbout
 
[6896795026]
Search
 
The Quality Gap
November 2025

What's Hiding Inside Haribo's Power Bank and Headphones?

Eric Petralia
By Eric Petralia
Reviewed by Alex Hao
[69275357f7]

In this Article:

[689a3d3de8]

  * Haribo's 20,000 mAh power bank and headphones show severe
    internal battery defects, including misaligned layers and torn
    electrodes.
  * Uneven anode overhang and poor quality control raise risks of
    lithium plating, short circuits, and thermal runaway.
  * Attractive specs masked poor cell geometry, making the devices
    unsafe despite their low weight and appealing design.

11.26.2025
Follow Us:
[660486a2d7][660486a223][660486a21c][660486813f]

Before it disappeared from Amazon, the Haribo 20,000 mAh power bank
spread quickly through backpacking communities. It offered high
capacity at a low weight, and its specs made it attractive to
ultralight hikers who count every gram. And it was cute to boot;
Haribo branding adorns the front and a gummy bear is attached to the
charging cable. For a few months it looked like a great deal with
broad appeal. 

Then the listing was pulled, with Amazon telling customers there was
a "potential safety or quality issue." DC Hong Kong Global, the
manufacturer of Haribo-branded electronics under license from the
gummy bear company, didn't publish a statement about the issue. 

We CT scanned the power bank along with a couple of the brand's
earbuds. Every product we scanned shows battery defects that increase
the likelihood of failure and possibly fires. 

[692753edd3]

Why backpackers loved it

A power bank sits at the intersection of energy storage, reliability,
and field conditions. Backpackers rely on GPS, weather forecasts, and
emergency communication. A battery failure can end a trip or create a
dangerous situation. When a lightweight pack promises substantial
capacity and has a great price, it's too much to resist.

The Haribo power bank weighs roughly 286g and has a capacity of
20,000 mAh. That ratio drew attention because it implied efficient
cell packaging. Our scans show that the structure inside the pouch
has bigger problems than sheer capacity.

[692753edd3]
Overview of the Haribo 20,000 mAh power bank

What we found inside the power bank

The power bank contains two pouch cells with poor edge alignment. The
electrodes don't form a uniform block. Instead, the layers bend and
rise in a wavy pattern. This pattern reflects uneven winding during
assembly. It also indicates that the electrodes were not stabilized
before sealing. 

Poor edge alignment can lead to uneven lithium plating, which in turn
can cause dendrite formation. This increases the risk of shortened
battery life, failure, and, depending on where the dendrites form,
the worst-case scenario of thermal runaway. The misaligned layers
also indicate poor process controls generally, and one has to
question the potential risks embedded in the other steps in the
battery manufacturing process. 

[6927543230]
Uneven edge alignment in the Haribo 20,000mAh power bank 

Deeper structural faults in headphones

The bluetooth headphones use smaller cells, but the defects inside
them are more severe.

The noise-canceling earbud has torn cathode layers near the top of
the stack. The tears leave exposed, irregular edges that can shift or
shed material during cycling. When present, they signal significant
problems in electrode cutting or handling, a clear indicator of a
lack of quality control. 

[692753edd3]
The two Haribo Bluetooth headphones

The same earbud shows inconsistent anode overhang. In some slices,
the anode layer  stretches far beyond the cathode. In others, it
nearly disappears. An even overhang provides room for the anode to
expand during charging. When it varies this widely, the cell cannot
maintain balance under normal use.

The lower-cost, basic set of earbuds also suffer from poor anode
overhang. We measured areas where the anode overhang was 0.072 mm,
far below the industry standard of about 0.5 mm. Sufficient anode
overhang is seen as a safety-critical feature to prevent irregular
lithium plating and dendrite formation. The lack of overhang we
observe in the earbuds meaningfully increases the likelihood that
these batteries could fail prematurely or even catch fire. 

The charging cases have the same issues. Their cells show poor
alignment and insufficient overhang. These problems are systematic
rather than isolated, indicating that all the cells across the
Haribo-branded product line may come from the same low-quality
supplier

[692754f8e9]
On left: battery from the noise canceling earbud. On the right:
battery from the low-cost earbud.

Why these defects matter

Pouch cells live inside compact enclosures with little space for
deformation. A poorly-wound cell with uneven layers is at an
increased risk of both performance and safety failures. Earbuds and
headphones operate in even smaller envelopes. Their cells have tight
enclosures and no ventilation path. A torn electrode or improper
overhang removes the safety margin that prevents localized heating.

In both cases, internal geometry dictates reliability. The aesthetics
and advertised capacity cannot compensate for unstable stacking.

What the scans tell us

The Haribo products show the same pattern: attractive specifications
that hide weak manufacturing controls. They raise the likelihood of
failure in environments where users expect consistency. Industrial CT
makes that gap visible. Once you see the internal stack, the
disappearance from Amazon makes sense.

Citations
No items found.
Eric Petralia
AUTHOR
Eric Petralia
Social Media Specialist at Lumafield
[660486a2d7][660486a21c]
Want the latest from First Article?
People also ask:

Never ship another bad product.

Protect your reputation and bottom line with CT inspection.

 
Contact Lumafield
[63ec4299f6]
changing the way
the world makes
everything
[66a98cb15c]
Industries
All Industries
Aerospace and Defense
Agriculture and Food
Athletic Equipment
Automotive
Batteries
Consumer Packaged Goods
Electronics
Medical Devices
Applications
Assembly Verification
Competitive Benchmarking and Analysis
Defect Detection
Design Verification and Validation
Dimensional Measurement
Failure Analysis
First Article Inspection (FAI)
Material Characterization
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT)
Quality Assurance and Control (QA & QC)
Reverse Engineering
Supplier Qualification
Products
NeptuneTritonVoyagerAtlas
Resources
LearnBlogResourcesFirst ArticleWhite PapersCT 101EventsWebinars
Engineers' BlogSupport
Solutions
Case StudiesAll Applications
Company
LoginAboutCareersPressContact
Close

Sign up for our newsletter

Sign up for our Newsletter
[660486a2d7][660486a223][660486a21c][660486813f]
info@lumafield.com
PrivacyInformation SecurityDeployment Services Agreement
(c) 2020 Lumafield. All Rights Reserved.