...battery companies make on disposable batteries. It's a huge industry, raking in billions every year.
True.
There's not even a huge incentive to work around the (real and perceived) issues of cell voltage, which they could do...
Please tell how. Chemistry is chemistry what should they do?
Who do I believe now? You or Dave Jones? Or the datasheets and the measurable characteristics of batteries. As far as I can tell there is not a problem with the battery manufacturers and the majority of gadgets we all use do not have this problem of wasting 80 odd percent of the battery power as the Bateriser claims.
...this guy's 8X battery extender is easily encased inside any battery from the get-go,..
Please tell how. Chemistry is chemistry what should they do?
You post the question then admit I'm talking about using a voltage upconverter in rechargeable batteries.
Does it really make more sense to put extra circuitry into every device that uses a battery, whether or not it's needed? It's far more cost effective to put it into the rechargeable battery. Buy it once. The batteries are reusable, and may even outlast the devices they're used in.
I've been talking about rechargeables -- 1.2V to 1.5V -- so I'm unclear why you're bringing up Dave Jones' comments. Are they cogent?
I'd trade that efficiency for the 50% (at best) discharge before the device fails. Sounds like a better deal to me.
Also, you're saying in your #2 to put into the device. That's a good idea, but some devices are really cheap (replacement remotes), less costly than the batteries themselves. So that's a non-starter from a business standpoint. And then you still have the reduced efficiency going through the circuitry if it's built into the device, so I'm not sure what you'r arguing.
You post the question then admit I'm talking about using a voltage upconverter in rechargeable batteries
OK, I'm confused. This whole thread is about the Bateriser and non-rechargable bateries.
Does it really make more sense to put extra circuitry into every device that uses a battery, whether or not it's needed?
Perhaps not. But as Dave points out most devices do not need any such thing already.
I've been talking about rechargeables -- 1.2V to 1.5V -- so I'm unclear why you're bringing up Dave Jones' comments. Are they cogent?
Always cogent. You are talking rechargeables. The whole device under discussion here is not about rechargeables.
I'm not sure what you'r arguing..
I'm arguing that the Bateriser is probably a complete waste of money and nobody should ever think of buying it.
Feel free to buy some and report back how well they work out.
At the end of the day I think we can agree that all devices have different power demands. What battery should it use? Rechargable or not? Where should the regulation be?
OK, I'm confused. This whole thread is about the Bateriser and non-rechargable bateries.
The thread title maybe, but since when do threads here not drift! At the start of Page 2 we started talking about just using rechargeables instead (and why people didn't).
Evan made the insightful remark that everyone should be using rechargeable batteries anyway. In a perfect world, that would happen, and the Batteriser would not even need to exist.
Consumers now have virtually no choice if their rechargeable cells give poor service because of lower nominal voltage. Where are rechargeable alkalines, and their 1.5V/cell output? I have to mail order them now. I used to be able to buy them at Target and Walmart.
Yes, Dave showed all kinds of *premium* electronics that likely are either designed for low-threshold voltage, or have a boost in them. (Plus, some tests were less-than-definitive, like shining a remote into a camcorder lens, rather than actually testing with the device it was meant to control. A slap on the wrist for not thinking that one through.)
Kids' toys, dollar store remotes, and many commodity consumer items bought at Walmart and similar price-conscious stores may not be as well made. So, it shouldn't be any wonder why people still use disposable batteries. In some cases, they're the only ones that work.
>I'd trade that efficiency for the 50% (at best) discharge before the device fails
If you left the bateriser on from the time you put a fresh battery in, the total length will be a loss.
If you wait until the device stop working, then you could get another week out it if it had a higher than normal cut out voltage (or does not use a boost circuit)
I have never paid for the multiple dozen's of alkaline batteries I have (always free after bonus bucks etc), so wasting $10+$5shipping for a set of 4 batteriser I would not do.
If you like to use rechargeable batteries and you are not letting go of your old ill-designed device that only works at 1.3V+, when this product is for you.
If you like to use rechargeable batteries and you are not letting go of your old ill-designed device that only works at 1.3V+, when this product is for you.
Rechargeable batteries have a nominal 1.2V per cell, not 1.3V (I know you know this, just wanted to make it clear). Mid-way through their use curve, under load (remote control with buttons actually being depressed) they might only output 1.1 volts, perhaps even less.
I'm not talking about the Batteriser, but having an equivalent circuit in the RECHARGEABLE batteries to begin with (please read what I actually wrote). This is functionally the same as a product with a boost already in it. These are marketed as 1.5V rechargeable cells, usable in even badly-designed cheap electronics, the kind many of us have. Sorry, I don't live in a world where I can solve things by posting a nasty review on YouTube, or just spend more money on something else. I wasn't aware making do with what I already have could be such a tough dilemma.
Kids' toys, dollar store remotes, and many commodity consumer items bought at Walmart and similar price-conscious stores may not be as well made. So, it shouldn't be any wonder why people still use disposable batteries. In some cases, they're the only ones that work.
In my experience with AA cells and the devices that use them I cannot think of one single instance of where a rechargeable failed to work. I still use alkalines in some things but only because I do not have enough Eneloops to go around - or in some devices like clocks where an alkaline will last more than a year it does not make sense to 'waste' an Eneloop in that situation.
However, before I made the switch to Eneloops I did have many disappointments with regards to rechargeables. Not because devices would not accept them but because the failure rate of the cells was so high. I had to take care to match the good cells together, it only takes one cell of reduced capacity to greatly impact how long a device will run, if at all. In many cases I suspect that people's experience with crappy rechargeables may have lead them to believe that alkalines are required in some devices.
In my experience with AA cells and the devices that use them I cannot think of one single instance of where a rechargeable failed to work
Not sure I've ever encountered an instance where they "failed," but they do seem to have a more limited discharge, leading to more frequent recharging. I once had a camera from a major manufacturer where new and freshly charged NiMH would last maybe 30-50 pictures, some with flash, some without, and dead in a week without using the camera if I didn't remember to pull the batts out between. The alkalines I could hundreds of shots, and the batteries could stay in the camera for a month or more.
So I just said to hell with it, and put disposable alkalines in it. Then I got a new camera with a lithium battery, and gave away my other one. Obviously it was not a great camera battery wise, but it's typical of what's out there in the real world.
I use rechargeable alkalines in robots because I like the 1.5V/cell output. The servos run faster, for one thing. Saidly, even a good rechrgeable alkaline has a more limited lifespan than the average NiMH, so about once a year and a few hundred charges I need to replace them. Even the local Fry's has (apparently) stopped selling them. Amazon is my friend, I guess.
I just wish there were more alternatives. There aren't many.
Not sure I've ever encountered an instance where they "failed," but they do seem to have a more limited discharge, leading to more frequent recharging. I once had a camera from a major manufacturer where new and freshly charged NiMH would last maybe 30-50 pictures, some with flash, some without, and dead in a week without using the camera if I didn't remember to pull the batts out between. The alkalines I could hundreds of shots, and the batteries could stay in the camera for a month or more.
That is my experience as well - before I switched to Eneloops. I must sound like an advertisement by now but they really are so much better than the NiMHs that I used to use. You really should give them a try. Costco has a good deal where you get ten AA, four AAA and a good charger (charges cells independently) for like $25. Probably other brands of the same chemistry would work as well but I have no reason to experiment with them.
It's not the battery's fault the device shuts down before the battery is flat. That's purely the device's fault.
Manufacturers are under no obligation to design their products for 1.2V/cell batteries if they feel operation is better using a specific type of battery. It's hardly their "fault" if you want to use 1.2V rechargeable cells. That's your choice.
You do realize most people use disposable batteries, mostly out of convenience but also because of lack of alternatives. So why should manufacturers bend over backwards to ensure their products work with 1.2V cells all the way down to the bottom of their curve? That's a wasteful way to spend R&D dollars. Very little return for the benefit only a fraction of customers will even know exists.
What's better is to make 1.5V rechargeables using some creative silicon. Those customers who educate themselves about the value will spend a little extra for the choice and benefit. That's all I'm saying.
The Batteriser is likely a lark for disposables, but the idea behind it -- and built into the cells themselves so there's no silly size issues -- has merit for extending rechargeables into products they might otherwise not be compatible with.
Manufacturers are under no obligation to design their products for 1.2V/cell batteries if they feel operation is better using a specific type of battery.
The thing is, the discharge curves of both alkalines and rechargeables really drop off at around 1.1V. Both types provide good power down to that voltage, the big difference being that rechargeables have a flatter curve. So I think a manufacturer really should be obligated to design for a 1.1V lower limit, regardless whether or not they have rechargeables in mind. To do otherwise is being very wasteful of energy.
If they design the product to make good use of alkalines then it will also work well with rechargeables, no "extra" R&D required.
While the average voltage of an alkaline is more like 1.2V. http://www.powerstream.com/z/AA-500mA.png Note that both Energizer and Duracell publish discharge curves that are not easy to compare, that's why I used the one linked.
Based upon the nature of alkaline discharge is would be ridiculous to design for such a high cut off voltage. Dave provided evidence that manufacturers do actually design them sensibly. Design for a 1.0V to 1.1V cutoff and the product will make best use of both types of batteries.
Another reason why rechargeables work well is voltage depression. It is my understanding that under load an alkaline will drop it's voltage much more than a rechargeable.
I get your points, I really do. But you're counting on tens of thousands of product manufacturers being good. The alternative is one battery manufacturer coming to the rescue.
I don't hold much hope for battery makers to resolve the issue on their own (unless forced by the market), but I have zero hope all these companies will suddenly put out better product. Not as long as we love these cheap Chinese imports.
Is the suggestion that battery manufacturers should build Bateriser type circuitry into billions and billions of batteries?
I might be missing a point here but I don't see how that is a good idea. It has marginal gains of battery life in some circumstances and does not fit other circumstances at all. Well, I guess the regulator chip manufacturers would like it.
Could been a niche market for those batteries a few years ago, soon nearly every manufacture will use some type of boost circuit even $1 keychain LED use them now.
Why not use 3.2V LifePO4 battery with a dummy, for those devices that use 2 AA in series.
I get your points, I really do. But you're counting on tens of thousands of product manufacturers being good. The alternative is one battery manufacturer coming to the rescue.
No. If a new battery chemistry is discovered that, say, produces 1.8 v to 1.4v per cell then the same device designers will just raise the cut-off of their newer devices to fail at a higher level.
It's 100% the fault of the device that doesn't accept a nominal voltage range. Such a device is "defective by design".
It's 100% the fault of the device that doesn't accept a nominal voltage range. Such a device is "defective by design".
I'm not sure if I've been following along closely enough but based on the above two quotes I take you consider the voltage range of a NiMH cell within this "nominal voltage range"?
This has not been my experience. I've had plenty of consumer electronics products (including digital cameras) which have not worked well with NiMH cells. I know I've own digital cameras which have stated in the manual not to use rechargeable batteries. I sure think it would be nice if all digital cameras which used AA cells accepted rechargeable batteries but I think you'd have a lot of designers of the products which would take issue with the claim these cameras are "defective by design."
I presently own a digital camera which seems to work fine with NiMH cells and I thrilled it does (since other cameras I've used haven't work well with rechargeable AA cells).
I hope I didn't just miss the point of what's being debated.
I'm not sure if I've been following along closely enough but based on the above two quotes I take you consider the voltage range of a NiMH cell within this "nominal voltage range"?
Totally. As W9GFO mentioned above, both disposables and rechargeables are flat at around 1.1 volts, 1.0 volts to be on the safe side.
... I know I've own digital cameras which have stated in the manual not to use rechargeable batteries.
You are talking about the same high drain device as everyone else I presume. The same device that performs poorly on alkalines! What are they saying? That only lithium disposables can be used?
Sounds to me like a perfect example of defective by design to me. I would totally take exception to their stupidity and be asking for my money back thank you very much.
Well, I had a free day today so I thought I would build my own!
See attached photo. Everything is built around a single AA 2600mAH rechargeable. Step this up with a 1 to 5V stepup converter ($1 on ebay). Works brilliantly. Next, test the droop characteristics of the module - yes, it is not a regulated module, so they can be added in parallel. (First experiment used a large LC filter, but decided they were not needed). Voltage output at 4.9V is 40mA and I need 80mA to power this circuit, so added three modules in parallel.
Next step - there is a board on the top right of the circuit that starts with A and best not mentioned on this forum But it is good for quick and simple testing. This board needs 7V input so its onboard regulators are a precise 5V. So grab a stepup converter ($1.70 on ebay) that converts 4.9V to 7V. It is a pity this module doesn't take input voltages down to 0.5V like the other modules do, but hey, this is building stuff inspired by Erco's cheap ebay specials.
Add an analog 5V meter to show the battery voltage.
Now the charging circuit. There are several ways to detect a battery is charged, but one of the simpler ones is to note that charging with 1A at 1.2V, approx 1W is going into the battery. When it is charging, pretty much all this energy goes into changing the internal chemistry. When it is charged, the energy goes into heat, and the battery warms up. If it warms up 5C more than the ambient, then the battery is charged. So... add a temp sensor for ambient, and a temp sensor on the battery.
Finally, the charging circuit. Again, another ebay special, this time a constant current/constant voltage module (only a few dollars, and it is essentially a laboratory grade power supply - I love the way stuff keeps getting cheaper!). Set the charge current at 1A, and set the max volts at (say) 1.7V. Turn off with the relay module ($2) when the battery is charged.
Now the supply. This is meant for a solar charger, so if the sun is shining, power from the sun, and if no sun, power from the battery. To set these, use a step down module ($1.70) that converts any voltage up to 30V down to a set voltage. (All these modules are switching modules so high efficiency). I set the solar volts at 8V and the battery stepup volts at 7.8V, and then used two diodes, so the higher one will power the circuit.
Why bother???
Well.
1) My original solar circuit used a 7aH 12V SLA battery. That is supposed to be over 80 watt hours. I measured 6.
2) Using batteries in series means that the battery pack's capacity is the capacity of the weakest cell, and as time goes on, the weakest cell gets weaker as it gets a reverse voltage first.
But... with just one cell, it can never be reverse voltaged. All it can do is go down to 0V, and my understanding is that NiMH don't care if they are completely flattened (unlike lead acids and lithiums, which are destroyed when completely flattened).
And the next crazy experiment, simply join multiple cells in parallel for increased capacity. They should all happily equalise.
Oh, and yes, this does run right down to 0.5V, but there are only a few minutes of energy left at that voltage.
Damn! That's getting stuck in. I would have given up when I needed to buy something.
I'm guessing the fully charged temperature differential will need to be tuned depending on charging current vs cell capacity, i.e: Cell internal resistance will generate heat even when not fully charged.
Good point evanh. To do this experiment properly I need an insulated container, maybe a couple of cm of white foam or similar. Then measure the temperatures. In theory, if a cell has, say, a 90% coulomb efficiency, the lost energy should appear as heat. I note that the cell is warmer when discharging as well, which would make sense. I'm basing my initial observations on charging with my maha c9000 charging at 1A, the cells are about body temperature when they are charged. But this charger uses a subtle voltage drop when charged rather than temperature. I figure temperature ought to be more reliable - the energy has to go somewhere. Actually, detecting a full charge is not a trivial task. Lead acids for instance just convert to electrolysis, but then you have to keep replacing the water.
I agree with evanh on this one. Makes more sense from an economic and environmental sense to put the regulating circuitry to make full use of NiMH and Alkaline batteries in a device that may use many batteries rather than in the other way around.
Is the suggestion that battery manufacturers should build Bateriser type circuitry into billions and billions of batteries?
I might be missing a point here but I don't see how that is a good idea. It has marginal gains of battery life in some circumstances and does not fit other circumstances at all. Well, I guess the regulator chip manufacturers would like it.
Are you being intentionally obtuse, or do you just not read other people's posts? My comments have NOTHING to do with battery life, and I already previously said the 1.5V output would be on premium cells sold specifically for this reason.
Why not use 3.2V LifePO4 battery with a dummy, for those devices that use 2 AA in series.
Because LiPOs require they own charger, or to have the device have charging circuitry (and port) on them. Your $1 keychain LED have that? Even most high-end remotes don't, though they could, and a USB/charging port might even provide a way to program the thing.
Keep with one type of charger for all removable batteries. Otherwise people aren't going to bother.
I agree with evanh on this one. Makes more sense from an economic and environmental sense to put the regulating circuitry to make full use of NiMH and Alkaline batteries in a device that may use many batteries rather than in the other way around.
I'm for that, too, except it isn't a realistic expectation. People here are SAYING that day will come, with no proof it is. I still unbox plenty of electronics that don't like rechargeable cells.
I still unbox plenty of electronics that don't like rechargeable cells.
I do too.
I don't like it and I wish consumer electronics manufactures held evenh's opinion that such designs are defective by design but this hasn't been my experience.
This has not been my experience. I've had plenty of consumer electronics products (including digital cameras) which have not worked well with NiMH cells. I know I've own digital cameras which have stated in the manual not to use rechargeable batteries. .
I think this is getting difficult to discuss because we are talking about two distinctly different battery types. The old style rechargeables of yesteryear of low reliability that would not hold a charge more than a few days, and the current technology (like Eneloop) that is vastly superior.
Unless otherwise stated I am going to assume that the negative experiences shared here are with the old style rechargeables. Manufacturers were probably aware of the troubles with old style rechargeables, it makes sense that they would advise in favor of alkalines.
I would be interested to hear if there are bad experiences using Eneloops (or their equivalent). From the data available, they appear to maintain a higher average voltage than alkalines.
Perhaps I was too tired to follow that the debate had changed from the claims of 800% energy gain of some gizomo used with non-rechargeable batteries to whatever the problem is with rechargeables.
I can only agree, the situation is a confusing mess for the consumer. Devices should specify their power requirements so that users buy what is appropriate for them.
I think my point was that the "fix" does not belong in the battery. It belongs in the devices.
I don't like it and I wish consumer electronics manufactures held evenh's opinion that such designs are defective by design but this hasn't been my experience.
A free market will do whatever it can get away with, or, in other words, whatever causes the largest volume of turnover. As long as consumers continue to hand over money for defective equipment it encourages intentionally flawed design because that brings the dissatisfied customers back for the next round of offers.
This is where regulations do serve a useful function.
Just dropped in here to give a heartfelt THANK YOU to W9GF0 for making me aware of Eneloop Ni-MH batteries' superior performance. Earlier this year I had acquired a Fuji FinePix camera which I took on a trip to San Francisco. Began taking lots of "tourist" shots when after about 20 or so pictures the battery indicator said the batteries were too low and shut down. Being at Pier 39 I had no difficulty buying some AA alkalines, though a bit pricey. After another 20 shots, same scenario, batteries too low, shut down. Dreaded sinking feeling creeps in that maybe I got a defective camera. Having an Alcatraz tour later that day I did not want to risk not having sufficient batteries I wound up buying another, larger pack of brand name alkalines, which just managed to get me through the day. Back home in Florida I shelved the camera until I began reading this thread and all the positive remarks about the Eneloop batteries. Ordered a combined package of 4 AA Panasonic batteries with a BQ-CC17 charger from Amazon. Got them in a couple of days, topped off the charge on all four - took about three hours and installed a pair into the camera, set it for Ni-MH. After over one hundred shots the battery indicator is still on full. With alkalines I would have been on 4 - 5 replacements at this point.
Again, thank you for making me aware of these batteries and your very strong support for them convinced me to try them.
Comments
Who do I believe now? You or Dave Jones? Or the datasheets and the measurable characteristics of batteries. As far as I can tell there is not a problem with the battery manufacturers and the majority of gadgets we all use do not have this problem of wasting 80 odd percent of the battery power as the Bateriser claims. Perhaps. However it makes no sense do so.
You post the question then admit I'm talking about using a voltage upconverter in rechargeable batteries.
Does it really make more sense to put extra circuitry into every device that uses a battery, whether or not it's needed? It's far more cost effective to put it into the rechargeable battery. Buy it once. The batteries are reusable, and may even outlast the devices they're used in.
I've been talking about rechargeables -- 1.2V to 1.5V -- so I'm unclear why you're bringing up Dave Jones' comments. Are they cogent?
I'd trade that efficiency for the 50% (at best) discharge before the device fails. Sounds like a better deal to me.
Also, you're saying in your #2 to put into the device. That's a good idea, but some devices are really cheap (replacement remotes), less costly than the batteries themselves. So that's a non-starter from a business standpoint. And then you still have the reduced efficiency going through the circuitry if it's built into the device, so I'm not sure what you'r arguing.
Feel free to buy some and report back how well they work out.
At the end of the day I think we can agree that all devices have different power demands. What battery should it use? Rechargable or not? Where should the regulation be?
The thread title maybe, but since when do threads here not drift! At the start of Page 2 we started talking about just using rechargeables instead (and why people didn't).
Evan made the insightful remark that everyone should be using rechargeable batteries anyway. In a perfect world, that would happen, and the Batteriser would not even need to exist.
Consumers now have virtually no choice if their rechargeable cells give poor service because of lower nominal voltage. Where are rechargeable alkalines, and their 1.5V/cell output? I have to mail order them now. I used to be able to buy them at Target and Walmart.
Yes, Dave showed all kinds of *premium* electronics that likely are either designed for low-threshold voltage, or have a boost in them. (Plus, some tests were less-than-definitive, like shining a remote into a camcorder lens, rather than actually testing with the device it was meant to control. A slap on the wrist for not thinking that one through.)
Kids' toys, dollar store remotes, and many commodity consumer items bought at Walmart and similar price-conscious stores may not be as well made. So, it shouldn't be any wonder why people still use disposable batteries. In some cases, they're the only ones that work.
If you left the bateriser on from the time you put a fresh battery in, the total length will be a loss.
If you wait until the device stop working, then you could get another week out it if it had a higher than normal cut out voltage (or does not use a boost circuit)
I have never paid for the multiple dozen's of alkaline batteries I have (always free after bonus bucks etc), so wasting $10+$5shipping for a set of 4 batteriser I would not do.
If you like to use rechargeable batteries and you are not letting go of your old ill-designed device that only works at 1.3V+, when this product is for you.
Rechargeable batteries have a nominal 1.2V per cell, not 1.3V (I know you know this, just wanted to make it clear). Mid-way through their use curve, under load (remote control with buttons actually being depressed) they might only output 1.1 volts, perhaps even less.
I'm not talking about the Batteriser, but having an equivalent circuit in the RECHARGEABLE batteries to begin with (please read what I actually wrote). This is functionally the same as a product with a boost already in it. These are marketed as 1.5V rechargeable cells, usable in even badly-designed cheap electronics, the kind many of us have. Sorry, I don't live in a world where I can solve things by posting a nasty review on YouTube, or just spend more money on something else. I wasn't aware making do with what I already have could be such a tough dilemma.
In my experience with AA cells and the devices that use them I cannot think of one single instance of where a rechargeable failed to work. I still use alkalines in some things but only because I do not have enough Eneloops to go around - or in some devices like clocks where an alkaline will last more than a year it does not make sense to 'waste' an Eneloop in that situation.
However, before I made the switch to Eneloops I did have many disappointments with regards to rechargeables. Not because devices would not accept them but because the failure rate of the cells was so high. I had to take care to match the good cells together, it only takes one cell of reduced capacity to greatly impact how long a device will run, if at all. In many cases I suspect that people's experience with crappy rechargeables may have lead them to believe that alkalines are required in some devices.
Not sure I've ever encountered an instance where they "failed," but they do seem to have a more limited discharge, leading to more frequent recharging. I once had a camera from a major manufacturer where new and freshly charged NiMH would last maybe 30-50 pictures, some with flash, some without, and dead in a week without using the camera if I didn't remember to pull the batts out between. The alkalines I could hundreds of shots, and the batteries could stay in the camera for a month or more.
So I just said to hell with it, and put disposable alkalines in it. Then I got a new camera with a lithium battery, and gave away my other one. Obviously it was not a great camera battery wise, but it's typical of what's out there in the real world.
I use rechargeable alkalines in robots because I like the 1.5V/cell output. The servos run faster, for one thing. Saidly, even a good rechrgeable alkaline has a more limited lifespan than the average NiMH, so about once a year and a few hundred charges I need to replace them. Even the local Fry's has (apparently) stopped selling them. Amazon is my friend, I guess.
I just wish there were more alternatives. There aren't many.
That is my experience as well - before I switched to Eneloops. I must sound like an advertisement by now but they really are so much better than the NiMHs that I used to use. You really should give them a try. Costco has a good deal where you get ten AA, four AAA and a good charger (charges cells independently) for like $25. Probably other brands of the same chemistry would work as well but I have no reason to experiment with them.
It's not the battery's fault the device shuts down before the battery is flat. That's purely the device's fault.
Manufacturers are under no obligation to design their products for 1.2V/cell batteries if they feel operation is better using a specific type of battery. It's hardly their "fault" if you want to use 1.2V rechargeable cells. That's your choice.
You do realize most people use disposable batteries, mostly out of convenience but also because of lack of alternatives. So why should manufacturers bend over backwards to ensure their products work with 1.2V cells all the way down to the bottom of their curve? That's a wasteful way to spend R&D dollars. Very little return for the benefit only a fraction of customers will even know exists.
What's better is to make 1.5V rechargeables using some creative silicon. Those customers who educate themselves about the value will spend a little extra for the choice and benefit. That's all I'm saying.
The Batteriser is likely a lark for disposables, but the idea behind it -- and built into the cells themselves so there's no silly size issues -- has merit for extending rechargeables into products they might otherwise not be compatible with.
The thing is, the discharge curves of both alkalines and rechargeables really drop off at around 1.1V. Both types provide good power down to that voltage, the big difference being that rechargeables have a flatter curve. So I think a manufacturer really should be obligated to design for a 1.1V lower limit, regardless whether or not they have rechargeables in mind. To do otherwise is being very wasteful of energy.
If they design the product to make good use of alkalines then it will also work well with rechargeables, no "extra" R&D required.
Notice that the average voltage for an Eneloop is very close to 1.3V at a 400 mAh draw. http://www.eneloop.eu/fileadmin/EDITORS/ENELOOP/DATA_SHEETS/HR-3UTGA_data_sheet.pdf
While the average voltage of an alkaline is more like 1.2V. http://www.powerstream.com/z/AA-500mA.png Note that both Energizer and Duracell publish discharge curves that are not easy to compare, that's why I used the one linked.
Based upon the nature of alkaline discharge is would be ridiculous to design for such a high cut off voltage. Dave provided evidence that manufacturers do actually design them sensibly. Design for a 1.0V to 1.1V cutoff and the product will make best use of both types of batteries.
Another reason why rechargeables work well is voltage depression. It is my understanding that under load an alkaline will drop it's voltage much more than a rechargeable.
I don't hold much hope for battery makers to resolve the issue on their own (unless forced by the market), but I have zero hope all these companies will suddenly put out better product. Not as long as we love these cheap Chinese imports.
I might be missing a point here but I don't see how that is a good idea. It has marginal gains of battery life in some circumstances and does not fit other circumstances at all. Well, I guess the regulator chip manufacturers would like it.
Why not use 3.2V LifePO4 battery with a dummy, for those devices that use 2 AA in series.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=LifePO4+Battery+Dummy&_sop=15
with charger
http://www.ebay.com/itm/2pcs-ETINESAN-1500MAH-3-2v-14500-AA-rechargable-battery-w-dummy-14500-Charger-/390980052915?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item5b083a27b3
No. If a new battery chemistry is discovered that, say, produces 1.8 v to 1.4v per cell then the same device designers will just raise the cut-off of their newer devices to fail at a higher level.
It's 100% the fault of the device that doesn't accept a nominal voltage range. Such a device is "defective by design".
I'm not sure if I've been following along closely enough but based on the above two quotes I take you consider the voltage range of a NiMH cell within this "nominal voltage range"?
This has not been my experience. I've had plenty of consumer electronics products (including digital cameras) which have not worked well with NiMH cells. I know I've own digital cameras which have stated in the manual not to use rechargeable batteries. I sure think it would be nice if all digital cameras which used AA cells accepted rechargeable batteries but I think you'd have a lot of designers of the products which would take issue with the claim these cameras are "defective by design."
I presently own a digital camera which seems to work fine with NiMH cells and I thrilled it does (since other cameras I've used haven't work well with rechargeable AA cells).
I hope I didn't just miss the point of what's being debated.
Totally. As W9GFO mentioned above, both disposables and rechargeables are flat at around 1.1 volts, 1.0 volts to be on the safe side.
You are talking about the same high drain device as everyone else I presume. The same device that performs poorly on alkalines! What are they saying? That only lithium disposables can be used?
Sounds to me like a perfect example of defective by design to me. I would totally take exception to their stupidity and be asking for my money back thank you very much.
See attached photo. Everything is built around a single AA 2600mAH rechargeable. Step this up with a 1 to 5V stepup converter ($1 on ebay). Works brilliantly. Next, test the droop characteristics of the module - yes, it is not a regulated module, so they can be added in parallel. (First experiment used a large LC filter, but decided they were not needed). Voltage output at 4.9V is 40mA and I need 80mA to power this circuit, so added three modules in parallel.
Next step - there is a board on the top right of the circuit that starts with A and best not mentioned on this forum
Add an analog 5V meter to show the battery voltage.
Now the charging circuit. There are several ways to detect a battery is charged, but one of the simpler ones is to note that charging with 1A at 1.2V, approx 1W is going into the battery. When it is charging, pretty much all this energy goes into changing the internal chemistry. When it is charged, the energy goes into heat, and the battery warms up. If it warms up 5C more than the ambient, then the battery is charged. So... add a temp sensor for ambient, and a temp sensor on the battery.
Finally, the charging circuit. Again, another ebay special, this time a constant current/constant voltage module (only a few dollars, and it is essentially a laboratory grade power supply - I love the way stuff keeps getting cheaper!). Set the charge current at 1A, and set the max volts at (say) 1.7V. Turn off with the relay module ($2) when the battery is charged.
Now the supply. This is meant for a solar charger, so if the sun is shining, power from the sun, and if no sun, power from the battery. To set these, use a step down module ($1.70) that converts any voltage up to 30V down to a set voltage. (All these modules are switching modules so high efficiency). I set the solar volts at 8V and the battery stepup volts at 7.8V, and then used two diodes, so the higher one will power the circuit.
Why bother???
Well.
1) My original solar circuit used a 7aH 12V SLA battery. That is supposed to be over 80 watt hours. I measured 6.
2) Using batteries in series means that the battery pack's capacity is the capacity of the weakest cell, and as time goes on, the weakest cell gets weaker as it gets a reverse voltage first.
But... with just one cell, it can never be reverse voltaged. All it can do is go down to 0V, and my understanding is that NiMH don't care if they are completely flattened (unlike lead acids and lithiums, which are destroyed when completely flattened).
And the next crazy experiment, simply join multiple cells in parallel for increased capacity. They should all happily equalise.
Oh, and yes, this does run right down to 0.5V, but there are only a few minutes of energy left at that voltage.
Single cell technology
I'm guessing the fully charged temperature differential will need to be tuned depending on charging current vs cell capacity, i.e: Cell internal resistance will generate heat even when not fully charged.
Are you being intentionally obtuse, or do you just not read other people's posts? My comments have NOTHING to do with battery life, and I already previously said the 1.5V output would be on premium cells sold specifically for this reason.
Because LiPOs require they own charger, or to have the device have charging circuitry (and port) on them. Your $1 keychain LED have that? Even most high-end remotes don't, though they could, and a USB/charging port might even provide a way to program the thing.
Keep with one type of charger for all removable batteries. Otherwise people aren't going to bother.
I'm for that, too, except it isn't a realistic expectation. People here are SAYING that day will come, with no proof it is. I still unbox plenty of electronics that don't like rechargeable cells.
I do too.
I don't like it and I wish consumer electronics manufactures held evenh's opinion that such designs are defective by design but this hasn't been my experience.
I think this is getting difficult to discuss because we are talking about two distinctly different battery types. The old style rechargeables of yesteryear of low reliability that would not hold a charge more than a few days, and the current technology (like Eneloop) that is vastly superior.
Unless otherwise stated I am going to assume that the negative experiences shared here are with the old style rechargeables. Manufacturers were probably aware of the troubles with old style rechargeables, it makes sense that they would advise in favor of alkalines.
I would be interested to hear if there are bad experiences using Eneloops (or their equivalent). From the data available, they appear to maintain a higher average voltage than alkalines.
No, I'm not being intentionally obtuse.
Perhaps I was too tired to follow that the debate had changed from the claims of 800% energy gain of some gizomo used with non-rechargeable batteries to whatever the problem is with rechargeables.
I can only agree, the situation is a confusing mess for the consumer. Devices should specify their power requirements so that users buy what is appropriate for them.
I think my point was that the "fix" does not belong in the battery. It belongs in the devices.
A free market will do whatever it can get away with, or, in other words, whatever causes the largest volume of turnover. As long as consumers continue to hand over money for defective equipment it encourages intentionally flawed design because that brings the dissatisfied customers back for the next round of offers.
This is where regulations do serve a useful function.
Again, thank you for making me aware of these batteries and your very strong support for them convinced me to try them.
Hal