Choosing a Battery Failure Analysis Lab: 8 Red Flags

To choose a battery failure analysis lab, check how it protects evidence, which techniques it runs, how it reports and how it handles your confidential samples. A failed cell can usually be opened only once, so a weak lab can destroy the evidence you need. The eight red flags below show what to watch for, and what to ask instead.

This list is for quality, reliability and R&D engineers at battery, EV, energy storage and device companies, and for university groups with failed cells. Use it before you ship anything.

8 red flags when choosing a battery failure analysis lab

1. No non-destructive step before teardown

A lab that opens cells straight away can lose evidence such as internal shorts, deformed windings or misplaced tabs. Good practice is to image cells with X-ray or CT first. Ask instead: “What non-destructive checks do you run before opening, and will I see the images?” Our article on X-ray vs CT battery inspection explains what each method can detect.

2. Vague sample intake and no chain of custody

If the lab cannot tell you who received your cells, where they are stored and who handled them, results will be hard to defend later. Ask instead: “How do you log, label and store incoming cells, and do I get an intake record with photos?”

3. No inert-atmosphere opening

Opening cells in room air lets moisture and oxygen react with electrodes, lithium deposits and electrolyte, changing what you are trying to observe. Ask instead: “Do you open cells in a glovebox or dry room, and how do you move samples to instruments without air exposure?”

4. Only one technique on offer

Battery failures rarely have a single signature. Labs that investigate them typically combine methods such as SEM-EDX for morphology and surface composition, XRD for crystal structure, XPS for surface chemistry, ICP or ICP-MS for elements, GC-MS for electrolyte and gas, EIS for electrical behaviour and X-ray tomography for internal structure. Ask instead: “Which techniques are in-house, which are subcontracted, and how do you decide which to use?”

5. Reports without teardown photos

A report that lists conclusions without photos of each layer, defect and sample location asks you to take its word for it. Ask instead: “Can I see a redacted sample report?” Look for photos, sample maps, raw data and the method behind each conclusion.

6. Data dumps with no root-cause hypothesis

Spectra and images are not an answer. A useful lab connects the evidence to a likely cause, says how confident it is and names what would confirm it. Ask instead: “Will the report state a root-cause hypothesis, the evidence for and against it, and next steps?”

7. Unclear quality system or accreditation

You should know how the lab controls its methods and instruments. ISO/IEC 17025 is the international standard for the competence of testing laboratories, and some labs hold it for specific methods. Not every useful lab is accredited for every test, but every good lab can explain its quality controls. Ask instead: “Which methods, if any, are accredited, and how are instruments calibrated?” See the ISO/IEC 17025 overview from ISO.

8. No clear confidentiality or sample-return terms

Failed cells reveal your design and materials. A lab that will not put confidentiality, subcontracting and the return or destruction of samples in writing is a risk. Ask instead: “Will you sign our NDA, list subcontractors, and return or destroy all parts with a written record?”

Vetting scorecard

Score each lab from 0 (no) to 2 (yes, with evidence) and compare totals. A lab that scores 0 on flags 1, 3 or 8 should usually be ruled out, whatever its price.

Check	Lab A	Lab B	Lab C
Non-destructive imaging before opening
Documented intake and chain of custody
Inert-atmosphere opening and transfer
Multiple in-house techniques
Sample report with photos and raw data
Root-cause hypothesis in reports
Explained quality system / accreditation scope
Written confidentiality and sample return
Total (max 16)

 

How to run a 30-minute lab comparison call

A short call with each shortlisted lab tells you more than a brochure. Use the same agenda for every lab so the answers can be compared.

1. Describe the failure briefly and ask how they would approach it. Listen for a plan that starts non-destructive and moves step by step.
2. Ask who will do the work. A named engineer with battery experience is a better sign than a general sales contact.
3. Ask for a redacted sample report. Check it for photos, sample maps, raw data and a stated hypothesis.
4. Ask about handling. How cells are stored, how damaged cells are made safe, and how samples move from glovebox to instruments.
5. Ask about confidentiality and subcontractors. Get the answer in writing.
6. Ask how they report uncertainty. A lab that admits when evidence is inconclusive is more trustworthy than one that always finds a cause.

Write the answers into the scorecard straight after each call. Differences between labs are usually obvious once the same questions sit side by side.

What to send with your failed cells

A good lab will ask for context. Prepare the cell history (cycling, storage and abuse conditions), what failed and when, photos taken before shipping, any electrical data, and your own hypothesis. Ship failed cells following your carrier’s and safety office’s rules, especially if they are damaged or swollen.

When an outside lab is not the right call

If the failure is a known, repeating defect and you have the tools, in-house teardown can be faster. If the cell is part of a legal dispute, you may need a lab and process approved by all parties before anything is opened. And some failures, especially fires that consumed the cell, may leave no clear root cause at all; an honest lab will tell you that up front.

This guide was written by Canrd’s engineers. If you want to compare us against this list, read about failure root cause analysis at Canrd and ask us the same questions.

Frequently asked questions

What techniques should a battery failure analysis lab offer?

Look for a mix: X-ray or CT imaging before opening, SEM-EDX, XRD and XPS for electrodes, ICP or ICP-MS for elements, GC-MS for electrolyte and gas, and EIS for electrical behaviour. Ask which are in-house and which are subcontracted, because that affects speed and confidentiality.

Does a failure analysis lab need ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation?

Not always. ISO/IEC 17025 shows a lab is competent for the specific methods it covers, which helps when results must stand up to scrutiny. Many capable labs are accredited for some tests only. Ask which methods are covered and how the rest are controlled.

Should cells be X-rayed before they are opened?

Yes, in most investigations. X-ray or CT imaging shows internal structure, shorts, deformation and tab problems without destroying evidence. Once a cell is opened, that view is lost. A lab that skips imaging should explain why it is not needed for your case.

What should a failure analysis report include?

A clear summary, the cell history you supplied, photos of each step and defect, a map of where samples came from, methods and raw data, a stated root-cause hypothesis with confidence level, and recommended next steps. Ask for a redacted example before you choose a lab.

 

Vetting labs for a failed cell? Ask us the same eight questions, and we will scope your investigation: speak with a specialist.