Whoops
Whoopsy powerline II+ strength tested college student style (and car talk)
2 Likes
Unfortunate to see it… these should have survived!
You are in luck, these have lifetime warranty, reach out to support@anker.com with the details , purchase proof to claim the warranty.
1 Like
How did it happen?
Hercules made a test?
Or was it Arnie from California?
I bet it was used as “lugworm” to catch the “white shark”! 
1 Like
Wow, that must have been a crazy studying session!
The replacement is already on its way. Anker support is the best!!
How it happened, I have no clue. I just noticed it when I went to use it. If I had to guess I stepped on it wrong one night. That actually was my very first Anker product, a USB to lighting version, so I don’t use it as much now I have a USB C to lighting.
3 Likes
Great result - as most of us expected 
Great Anker Support! 
Woah. How did that happen? As long as you didn’t do anything… uhh… dumb- then you can warranty replace it has it has a lifetime warranty!
Edit: well oops. I saw you already answered lol. That’s crazy. I’ve never had that happen.
If I recall correctly, one of the upgrades on the +III is that the metal part (same part that you bent) is actually stronger
It can be a bad idea to make something too strong, stronger than what is attached to as you really want the cable to bend and snap before the phone snaps. A bit like you dont want the front of a car to be too strong as that simply means a higher G force deceleration which breaks your ribs.
So that level of strength may be deliberate.
It’s also good of Anker to free warranty replacement as it reads as user error.
Glad Anker is taking care of it
Which brings me to my next topic of discussion. How is the Tesla cyber truck allowed to be entirely made of that bullet proof steel? Surely it’s a hazard.
1 Like
When the seatbelt was being invented, they had to use accelerometers on dummies with human-like internal structure of similar strength and work out how “bad”, in terms of speed to lock in place, to cause only minor non-fatal injuries to a human, you can make too-strong a seatbelt which holds you in place quicker which then causes your velocity to drop faster, higher deceleration, more force. Energy is force times distance so for absorbing energy, you get less force over a longer distance.
When that was combined with a car being deliberately tuned weakness so that at normal legal velocities all the energy was absorbed before the need-to-be-strong-for-combusion engine crushed into the human. So a just-weak-enough chasis with a just-weak-enough seatbelt meant the vehicle stopped moving before the engine crushed you and the seatbelt kept you from the dashboard just in time.
So you need to tune how bad things are as the human is quite weak, human designed for human level of velocities like running, a human can only stop at say 20 mph, so you have to spread out the 70mph (Energy to square of velocity, so 70mph is 12x more energy than running, or if hitting oncoming 70mph is 49x more energy of running) into a minimum time to come to a halt.
So if you did make a vehicle which did not have a crumple zone, the seatbelt has to be necessarily less reactive and you’d have to more distance from the dashboard, and possibly more distance from the steering wheel you could not even reach the steering wheel, so it would have to withdraw from you, go forwards / upwards rapidly if an accident started.
You then have the issue also that if a too-strong vehicle encountered another vehicle, it would not being its “fair share” of withdrawing from the common point of collision and so the too-strong would crush the “normal” vehicle and so cause more injuries for the passengers in the normal vehicle.
Or, in less words, it would either be illegal under common safety tests, or cause bankrupcy for Tesla for not hiring some decent engineers who know this already.
So back to an iPhone cable. Imagine the cord somehow was being pulled back over the iphone so the cord was not being pulled out by a strong force, you’d want the end of the cable to fail before the iphone failed. Anker could choose metal strength stronger than the iphone and so the cable survives more often but resulted in more iphone damage. Anker’s engineers may deliberately decided to make the metal end weak enough below the strength of the iphone and take a hit on warranty replacement, factoring how many warranty replacement into the price. So an intelligent engineer may be behind this incident.
2 Likes
Huh, that’s very interesting. I read that Tesla might be Forced to put a crumple zone on the front instead of just the solid steel. I think it would be put together in such a way that it still looks like a solid piece of metal.
The problem with that, is that the truck doesn’t use a standard frame- it uses the steel as an exoskeleton. So they would need a metal that can support the exoskeleton, but still have a crumple zone.
Having the cable break before the phone under those circumstances is a must. I would always rather have the cheaper product break first. Especially if it’s something more expensive like a laptop.
One way to not have a crumple zone is self drive car with the seat having more empty space around and you move for longer inside before stopping.
Ultimately the safest is self driving vehicles as accidents are caused by humans, usually deliberately by speeding , lane changing, not looking, etc.
If you then didn’t own a vehicle and just summoned one, akin to Uber, and it picked up / dropped off multiple people sharing similar routes, then those vehicles would charge themselves when not needed at specific charging places, and so you’d solve road deaths, pollution, parking all in 1. Some may feel that’s not desirable but it is inevitable because as soon as self-driving becomes safer than driving, initially you only pay more insurance as you will becoming a greater share cause of the reducing total accidents and eventually you’d be illegal to drive.
Similarly, the notion of buying clothes will have to vanish as the environmental cost of making and distributing clothes to only sit in a wardrobe barely worn will become banned, you’d have a VR experience to “try on” clothes and then you rent them and robots pickup/dropoff and robots clean them. Then the total amount of clothing equals the total number of people plus time to clean plus a small overhead for the odd days more people want a particular colour.
For cables, I am cool with them strengthening the part which connects to the plug, but there is a limit when you begin to cause more problems than solved.
I can also see an end to ports anyway, they reduce chance of damage to phone and its wireless everything.
I don’t like the idea of only renting vehicles. Self driving is obviously far superior.
I’ve never understood owning a bunch of different clothes. You only need just over a weeks worth of clothes, and maybe 3 pairs of shoes.
Well food shops will also have to vanish as it causes food wastage, you’d be delivered a fixed nutrition meal cooked by robots to balance food growth, so none of the food traveling far and going rotten, about half of food is wasted by free choice.
I think you’re looking further into the future then me 
. I don’t expect to see any of that in my lifetime. Only self driving cars
I don’t really believe in the self driving cars… now nor in future, cannot trust life of my near dear ones in hands of some smart (dumb) AI program… I had rather drive the car myself.
But that is me… as it is, don’t get to drive much these days, don’t want machine to take whatever driving pleasure which is left for me