Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Re: Battery question

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Battery question

 
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
On 10/17/2012 01:04 AM, nospam wrote:
> In article <k5l7lb$gnm$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>> <http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/rising_internal_resistance>
>>> Alkaline, carbon-zinc and other primary batteries have a relatively
>>> high internal resistance, and this limits its use to low-current
>>> applications such as flashlights, remote controls, portable
>>> entertainment devices and kitchen clocks. As these batteries
>>> discharge, the resistance increases further. This explains the
>>> relative short runtime when using alkaline cells in digital cameras.
>>>

>> Nice quote but I still live by what happens in the real world

>
> what happens in the real world is exactly that quote. you *can't* get
> around the laws of physics and chemistry.
>
> replace your defective nicads with modern nimh batteries.
>



Why would I do that in a camera I stopped using many years ago?

again, your comments are not making sense

--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 4:11:41 AM UTC+1, philo wrote:
> On 10/16/2012 06:37 PM, nospam wrote:
>
> > In article <k5koth$m5l$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>

>
> > wrote:

>
> >

>
> >>>> Discharge curves aside I am going by empirical results.

>
> >>>

>
> >>> your results can't change the battery chemistry.

>
> >>>

>
> >>>> In my camera I could get a minimum of 20 photo shoots on a set of

>
> >>>> alkaline batteries.

>
> >>>

>
> >>> you must mean 20 photos. alkaline batteries can't source enough current

>
> >>> to last very long in a digital camera. they're usually drained in a

>
> >>> very short time. they work well for low current applications, such as

>
> >>> radios, and in fact, once they're exhausted in a camera, you can put

>
> >>> them in a radio and continue to use them for quite a while.

>
> >>

>
> >> You are thinking of those (I believe now obsolete) standard carbon

>
> >> batteries.

>
> >

>
> > nope.

>
> >

>
> >> I am talking about alkaline batteries.

>
> >

>
> > so am i. in fact, i specifically said alkaline.

>
> >

>
> >> Depending on the mfg they are approx the same ampere-hour as a nicad

>
> >> though there is quite a bit of variance.

>
> >

>
> > alkaline batteries actually have much higher capacity than nicad and

>
> > they're comparable or a little higher than nimh, but as i said, they

>
> > can only realize that capacity at lower current draws. in a camera,

>
> > where current draw is high, alkaline won't last long, but in a radio,

>
> > where current draw is very low, alkaline will last quite a while.

>
> >

>
> >> If two batteries have about the same amp-hour

>
> >> it does not take a genius to know the ones that have a higher voltage

>
> >> will produce more power

>
> >

>
> > apparently it does, because the battery chemistry and specifically, its

>
> > internal resistance, makes a big difference.

>
> >

>
> > <http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/rising_internal_resistance>

>
> > Alkaline, carbon-zinc and other primary batteries have a relatively

>
> > high internal resistance, and this limits its use to low-current

>
> > applications such as flashlights, remote controls, portable

>
> > entertainment devices and kitchen clocks. As these batteries

>
> > discharge, the resistance increases further. This explains the

>
> > relative short runtime when using alkaline cells in digital cameras.

>
> >

>
>
>
>
>
> Nice quote but I still live by what happens in the real world
>


Is that the new one that has 4 suns

>
>
> --
>
> https://www.createspace.com/3707686


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
On 10/17/2012 05:22 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 4:11:41 AM UTC+1, philo wrote:
>> On 10/16/2012 06:37 PM, nospam wrote:
>>
>>> In article <k5koth$m5l$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>

>>
>>> wrote:

>>
>>>

>>
>>>>>>



Ok there are now two people here who have mis-interpreted what I wrote
so I had to re-read my posts to find out why. The fault was on my end
for not being clear...so here goes again:


The camera I used required a 6 volt battery (viz: four AA's)

When the battery voltage dropped to approx 4.5v the camera ceased
functioning. To simplify things in the trivial calculations I'll just
call the overall voltage 4.4v which gives a minimum volts/per cell of
1.1 volts.


With four new alkaline batteries starting out at 6 volts (even though
the discharge curve is steeper than that of nicad) ...at 1.5 volts
/cell the camera can be used for a long time (maybe one hour of
continuous use) before the voltage drops to 1.1 volts / cell.
Note: At this time the alkaline batteries are 100% discharged.


To those here unfamiliar with battery terminology...100% discharge does
*not* mean zero voltage, it means the chemical reaction is fully
complete and the battery can no longer supply it's rated current. (A bit
of an oversimplification)


Now the nicads, starting out at 1.2 volts per cell (even though they
have a flatter discharge curve than alkalines) did not take too long to
get down to 1.1 volts per cell (perhaps 15 minutes of continuous use)

The important thing to note is that the nicad batteries were only
*partially* discharged. Were it possible to have put a fifth battery in
series the nicads would easily have given as long a time-of-use as the
alkalines or probably more.


It was *not* a case that the nicads became 100% discharged sooner than
the alkaline batteries...it was simply that the over all voltage was
less. They came to the cut off point for the camera considerably sooner
than the alkalines even though they were not yet dead (or 100% discharged)


The voltage was too low to allow the batteries to be fully discharged.






 
Reply With Quote
 
Whisky-dave
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:40:21 PM UTC+1, philo wrote:
> On 10/17/2012 05:22 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 4:11:41 AM UTC+1, philo wrote:

>
> >> On 10/16/2012 06:37 PM, nospam wrote:

>
> >>

>
> >>> In article <k5koth$m5l$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>

>
> >>

>
> >>> wrote:

>
> >>

>
> >>>

>
> >>

>
> >>>>>>

>
>
>
>
>
> Ok there are now two people here who have mis-interpreted what I wrote
>
> so I had to re-read my posts to find out why. The fault was on my end
>
> for not being clear...so here goes again:
>
>
>
>
>
> The camera I used required a 6 volt battery (viz: four AA's)
>
>
>
> When the battery voltage dropped to approx 4.5v the camera ceased
>
> functioning.


Working in electronics and I;'m not sure how old your camera is but in electronics TTL (in photography was through the lens metering) in electronics it's Transistor-Transitor logic (now pretty much replaced)
TTL chips had a working supply voltage range of 4.75 to 5.25.

The modern equivant of TTL Is the HC series which can work from 2V to 6V
But of course others sections may required differnt voltages common today are 5V 3.3V 2.7V and some on 1.3V.

To simplify things in the trivial calculations I'll just
>
> call the overall voltage 4.4v which gives a minimum volts/per cell of
>
> 1.1 volts.
>
>
>
>
>
> With four new alkaline batteries starting out at 6 volts (even though
>
> the discharge curve is steeper than that of nicad) ...at 1.5 volts
>
> /cell the camera can be used for a long time (maybe one hour of
>
> continuous use) before the voltage drops to 1.1 volts / cell.


This depends on the current drawn of course.
I also ran a test a copule of years ago.
Using two AA and a white LED to draw current

at the start of teh test the voltage across the battereis was 3.1V with the LED lit. I eneded the test with the LED slighly less bright and the battery voltages being 2.45V after 2,712 hours. (I got bored watching)

>
> Note: At this time the alkaline batteries are 100% discharged.


No they are not, what happened is that the resultant voltage 1.1V isn't enough to power the cirucut so it switches off.



>
> To those here unfamiliar with battery terminology...100% discharge does
>
> *not* mean zero voltage,


but it not 100% discharge either.

>it means the chemical reaction is fully
>
> complete and the battery can no longer supply it's rated current. (A bit
>
> of an oversimplification)


True it can still supply current but not at the rated amount at the rated voltage.



>
> Now the nicads, starting out at 1.2 volts per cell (even though they
>
> have a flatter discharge curve than alkalines) did not take too long to
>
> get down to 1.1 volts per cell (perhaps 15 minutes of continuous use)


Because they have lower internal resistance, they can be discharged quicker, it's like car traveling faster uses more fuel and it might not be as efficint either traveling less distance.


>
>
>
> The important thing to note is that the nicad batteries were only
>
> *partially* discharged. Were it possible to have put a fifth battery in
>
> series the nicads would easily have given as long a time-of-use as the
>
> alkalines or probably more.


What if you put 5 alkaline battreis I'm pretty sure they'd work at 5.5V .


>
>
>
>
>
> It was *not* a case that the nicads became 100% discharged sooner than
>
> the alkaline batteries...it was simply that the over all voltage was
>
> less. They came to the cut off point for the camera considerably sooner
>
> than the alkalines even though they were not yet dead (or 100% discharged)
>
>
>
>
>
> The voltage was too low to allow the batteries to be fully discharged.


But that works the same for pretty much all batteries, even car batteries.


 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
In article <k5mcg0$65g$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> Ok there are now two people here who have mis-interpreted what I wrote
> so I had to re-read my posts to find out why. The fault was on my end
> for not being clear...so here goes again:
>
> The camera I used required a 6 volt battery (viz: four AA's)
>
> When the battery voltage dropped to approx 4.5v the camera ceased
> functioning. To simplify things in the trivial calculations I'll just
> call the overall voltage 4.4v which gives a minimum volts/per cell of
> 1.1 volts.
>
> With four new alkaline batteries starting out at 6 volts (even though
> the discharge curve is steeper than that of nicad) ...at 1.5 volts
> /cell the camera can be used for a long time (maybe one hour of
> continuous use) before the voltage drops to 1.1 volts / cell.
> Note: At this time the alkaline batteries are 100% discharged.


false.

a steeper discharge curve means it has a shorter run time. very simple.

furthermore, if you put them in a low current device, such as a radio,
they will continue to work and last quite a while, because they aren't
actually 100% discharged. it's just that the camera demands more
current than they can provide.

> To those here unfamiliar with battery terminology...100% discharge does
> *not* mean zero voltage, it means the chemical reaction is fully
> complete and the battery can no longer supply it's rated current. (A bit
> of an oversimplification)


that's quite a bit of oversimplification.

> Now the nicads, starting out at 1.2 volts per cell (even though they
> have a flatter discharge curve than alkalines) did not take too long to
> get down to 1.1 volts per cell (perhaps 15 minutes of continuous use)


your nicads are defective.

> The important thing to note is that the nicad batteries were only
> *partially* discharged. Were it possible to have put a fifth battery in
> series the nicads would easily have given as long a time-of-use as the
> alkalines or probably more.


wrong.

however, replacing them with fresh nimh would *easily* give a longer
run time than alkaline in a high current draw device, such as a camera.

> It was *not* a case that the nicads became 100% discharged sooner than
> the alkaline batteries...it was simply that the over all voltage was
> less.


no, it's that alkaline batteries don't last long in high current draw
devices and that nicad batteries don't have very high capacity compared
to nimh and yours appear to be defective.

> They came to the cut off point for the camera considerably sooner
> than the alkalines even though they were not yet dead (or 100% discharged)
>
> The voltage was too low to allow the batteries to be fully discharged.


wrong.
 
Reply With Quote
 
jdanield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
Don't forget the higher internal resistance of the alkaline battery
makes the real voltage lower than in open circuit. the voltage should
always be mesured with a charge identical to the one in real use.

jdd
 
Reply With Quote
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012

"nospam" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:171020120910538778%(E-Mail Removed)...
> In article <k5mcg0$65g$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>



<snip>

You are so completely wrong I am now having to now classify you as a troll



 
Reply With Quote
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012

"jdanield" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:k5mmon$cq0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Don't forget the higher internal resistance of the alkaline battery makes
> the real voltage lower than in open circuit. the voltage should always be
> mesured with a charge identical to the one in real use.
>
> jdd



"no spam" is a troll I will no longer be seeing his posts

I've wasted enough time with him


 
Reply With Quote
 
philo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012

"Whisky-dave" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 2:40:21 PM UTC+1, philo wrote:
>> On 10/17/2012 05:22 AM, Whisky-dave wrote:
>>
>> > On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 4:11:41 AM UTC+1, philo wrote:

>>
>> >> On 10/16/2012 06:37 PM, nospam wrote:

>>
>> >>

>>



"No spam" is a troll I had to plonk him

I was foolish to waste my time with him


 
Reply With Quote
 
nospam
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-17-2012
In article <k5mp4r$sie$(E-Mail Removed)>, philo <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> You are so completely wrong I am now having to now classify you as a troll


i'm not wrong at all. multiple links show *you* to be wrong.

what you have described contradicts how batteries work. period.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CMOS battery low wrong memory on CMOS battery Uncle Nobby Computer Information 1 11-08-2006 12:13 AM
Manufacturer Battery vs. OEM Battery rab Digital Photography 13 05-10-2005 06:56 AM
Should I buy original Battery or the replacement Battery ? eko Digital Photography 4 04-17-2004 03:52 AM
Making battery pack for Li battery. roror Digital Photography 2 10-09-2003 05:24 AM
Poor Mans NIMH Battery Pack and SLA Battery Pack ajacobs2 Digital Photography 0 08-19-2003 12:42 PM



Advertisments