flashlight
Flashlight Enthusiast
My CBA (Revision 1) is on sale here but I paid 'extra' for international shipping so I think only someone outside of the US would be interested. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/icon23.gif
Alkaline Battery Shoot Out
- Thread starter SilverFox
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
ok have any of you compared alkaline batteries with heavy duty batteries? I have heard that alkaline are better and are to last longer than the heavy duty ones.If this is true i would gladly pay a little more for the alkalines.Give me your feedback.
SilverFox
Flashaholic
Hello Aestryker,
Welcome to CPF.
The only Heavy Duty cells I tested were the Ray O Vac AAA and AA's. Their performance was not very good in comparison to the alkaline's at the currents I was testing at. The graphs are a bit full of information, but you should be able to find the information on them in my first post.
The Heavy Duty cells are supposed to be suited for low current applications, but I think Alkaline's will still beat them. I need to do a test at 0.05 amps or something like that to see if the Heavy Duty cells can make a showing for themselves.
Tom
Welcome to CPF.
The only Heavy Duty cells I tested were the Ray O Vac AAA and AA's. Their performance was not very good in comparison to the alkaline's at the currents I was testing at. The graphs are a bit full of information, but you should be able to find the information on them in my first post.
The Heavy Duty cells are supposed to be suited for low current applications, but I think Alkaline's will still beat them. I need to do a test at 0.05 amps or something like that to see if the Heavy Duty cells can make a showing for themselves.
Tom
Oh yea there is a pretty good difference.I tried a set of alkalines in my sons game boy and man what a difference.It has been almost a week now and they are still going strong.With the heavy duty ones he would have been begging for new ones by now.I cant believe it.
twentysixtwo
Enlightened
wOW, Fantastic job and presentation. One question I have lurking in the back of my mind is the battery to battery variation - if you ran say, 6 or 8 batteries of the same brand and type, what would the difference in capacity and performance be?
SilverFox
Flashaholic
Hello Twentysixtwo,
Most of the tests were done with a minimum of 2 batteries for each run. I saw little difference in the test results between the test runs.
I am curious if I run a test a year from now if the results will be similar.
Tom
Most of the tests were done with a minimum of 2 batteries for each run. I saw little difference in the test results between the test runs.
I am curious if I run a test a year from now if the results will be similar.
Tom
chevrofreak
Flashlight Enthusiast
I'd like to see a test of the Eveready Super Heavy Duty batteries. Target has them in their $1 area, in a 4 pack. They also have some 2 packs of apparently higher grade batteries.
I'm running the D cells in my 4D M@G
I'm running the D cells in my 4D M@G
Interesting read, I've recently switched over from the cheap heavy duty batteries to alkaline and noticed right away that they last much longer. chevro I think you'll find that heavy duty won't last nearly as long as alkaline. At least in my experience.
SilverFox
Flashaholic
Hello Chevrofreak and Aestryker,
I have checked out various technical information on the Heavy Duty batteries available from various manufacturers. The all seem to publish similar data to what I have shown.
For example, Energizer lists the capacity of an AA Heavy Duty battery as 1.100 Ah with a 0.025 amp load. If you look at the constant discharge graph, this works out to around 30 minutes at a 0.5 amp load. The Ray O Vac's I tested ran for 31.6 minutes which tells me that the Energizer's are very similar to the Ray O Vac's. In this chemistry, I suspect that the other brands would be very similar.
My purpose in testing the cells, was to demonstrate the performance under loads that we would see while using our lights. In this context, the Heavy Duty batteries do not hold up very well at all. The Ray O Vac Heavy Duty battery gave me about 32 minutes of run time with a steep voltage decline, where the Ray O Vac Alkaline battery gave me close to 180 minutes with a much more stable voltage decline. Looking strictly at run time, you would end up changing the Heavy Duty batteries about 6 times to get the same run time from one Alkaline battery. I suppose that a cost comparison could suggest something a bit different, but I'll stay away from them for my applications.
Now, if you have a light that only draws 0.025 amps, you might be able to get the rated performance from them. On the other hand the Alkaline batteries with 2.6X the capacity (in the same size) would give you even longer run times.
At any rate, I doubt I will be testing any more Heavy Duty batteries.
Tom
I have checked out various technical information on the Heavy Duty batteries available from various manufacturers. The all seem to publish similar data to what I have shown.
For example, Energizer lists the capacity of an AA Heavy Duty battery as 1.100 Ah with a 0.025 amp load. If you look at the constant discharge graph, this works out to around 30 minutes at a 0.5 amp load. The Ray O Vac's I tested ran for 31.6 minutes which tells me that the Energizer's are very similar to the Ray O Vac's. In this chemistry, I suspect that the other brands would be very similar.
My purpose in testing the cells, was to demonstrate the performance under loads that we would see while using our lights. In this context, the Heavy Duty batteries do not hold up very well at all. The Ray O Vac Heavy Duty battery gave me about 32 minutes of run time with a steep voltage decline, where the Ray O Vac Alkaline battery gave me close to 180 minutes with a much more stable voltage decline. Looking strictly at run time, you would end up changing the Heavy Duty batteries about 6 times to get the same run time from one Alkaline battery. I suppose that a cost comparison could suggest something a bit different, but I'll stay away from them for my applications.
Now, if you have a light that only draws 0.025 amps, you might be able to get the rated performance from them. On the other hand the Alkaline batteries with 2.6X the capacity (in the same size) would give you even longer run times.
At any rate, I doubt I will be testing any more Heavy Duty batteries.
Tom
Wow, I finally got around to reading this great thread.
I think the first couple graphs with the lithium AA's must be mislabelled--the lithiums are shown as 1.xx AH in the first graph and 3.4 in the second.
I'd be interested in a test of Walgreen alkaline cells since those are the cheapest C and D sized alkalines I know of (12 for $9.99 regular price). I can send you a few if you want to test them.
I think the first couple graphs with the lithium AA's must be mislabelled--the lithiums are shown as 1.xx AH in the first graph and 3.4 in the second.
I'd be interested in a test of Walgreen alkaline cells since those are the cheapest C and D sized alkalines I know of (12 for $9.99 regular price). I can send you a few if you want to test them.
SilverFox
Flashaholic
Hello Paul,
I think you got the graphs a bit confused. The first Lithium graph is for AAA cells, the second and third are for AA cells.
Thanks for your offer of Walgreen cells. I have a Walgreen just down the road, so I don't think that will be necessary. I'll stop by and pick some up.
I am trying to get some time to add some C cell testing to these graphs. Too many toys... Priorities, Priorities, Priorities...
Tom
I think you got the graphs a bit confused. The first Lithium graph is for AAA cells, the second and third are for AA cells.
Thanks for your offer of Walgreen cells. I have a Walgreen just down the road, so I don't think that will be necessary. I'll stop by and pick some up.
I am trying to get some time to add some C cell testing to these graphs. Too many toys... Priorities, Priorities, Priorities...
Tom
eebowler
Flashlight Enthusiast
Hello SilverFox. First of all, I would like to thank you very much for all the effort and finances you've put into making these wonderful charts. A guid like what you have provided is invaluable to us all. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
[ QUOTE ]
SilverFox said:
Hello Lynx Arc,
I did a second and third run on the Duracell Ultra's at a 0.5 Amp Rate after letting them rest for a while. The second test gave me a run time of 20 minutes. The thrid run only gave me 5 minutes.
Tom
[/ QUOTE ]
With respect to the above statement and to what Lynx_Arc has been saying.I have a few coments and questions if you don't mind...
Ok, for alkaline cells it is a fact that at low current loads (am I using the terms correctly?) the observed mAh numbers approach what manufacturers rate their cells at. It is also a fact that the observed mAh numbers of the cells at high current draws are much lower than the manufacturer's ratings.
Energiser rates their D cells at 18.000Ah. I would assume that if you reduce the load to some rediculously low value, you may actually reach (or even surpass)the rating of 18Ah right? To me this means that a D size Energizer Max cell has the chemicals inside of it to provide under ideal conditions 18Ah of energy. If that is the case,then what happens to the rest of the energy (16.875Ah)when put onder a load of 3A?
Without being properly informed as yet, my theory(assumption) is this: We all know that alkaline cells have the ability to rejuvinate. This has been proven in the quote above. What I believe is that when left to rejuvinate, a cell tested under 3A initially will provide much more energy when tested a second and third (or more)time compared to a cell initially tested under a load of .5A. I believe that cells tested at .5A will use up a higher percentage of its total energy in the first run compared to a cell tested at 3A...
Does my logic make sense? SilverFox do you have any of the cells you put through the tests? Are they labled? Would it be possible to put them through other tests to determine how much total energy they have? (or if my theory is correct?)
Thanks alot guys...
[ QUOTE ]
SilverFox said:
Hello Lynx Arc,
I did a second and third run on the Duracell Ultra's at a 0.5 Amp Rate after letting them rest for a while. The second test gave me a run time of 20 minutes. The thrid run only gave me 5 minutes.
Tom
[/ QUOTE ]
With respect to the above statement and to what Lynx_Arc has been saying.I have a few coments and questions if you don't mind...
Ok, for alkaline cells it is a fact that at low current loads (am I using the terms correctly?) the observed mAh numbers approach what manufacturers rate their cells at. It is also a fact that the observed mAh numbers of the cells at high current draws are much lower than the manufacturer's ratings.
Energiser rates their D cells at 18.000Ah. I would assume that if you reduce the load to some rediculously low value, you may actually reach (or even surpass)the rating of 18Ah right? To me this means that a D size Energizer Max cell has the chemicals inside of it to provide under ideal conditions 18Ah of energy. If that is the case,then what happens to the rest of the energy (16.875Ah)when put onder a load of 3A?
Without being properly informed as yet, my theory(assumption) is this: We all know that alkaline cells have the ability to rejuvinate. This has been proven in the quote above. What I believe is that when left to rejuvinate, a cell tested under 3A initially will provide much more energy when tested a second and third (or more)time compared to a cell initially tested under a load of .5A. I believe that cells tested at .5A will use up a higher percentage of its total energy in the first run compared to a cell tested at 3A...
Does my logic make sense? SilverFox do you have any of the cells you put through the tests? Are they labled? Would it be possible to put them through other tests to determine how much total energy they have? (or if my theory is correct?)
Thanks alot guys...
SilverFox
Flashaholic
Hello Eebowler,
Interesting questions...
I believe the answer has to do with heat. At higher current drains, the internal resistance of the cell uses up the chemistry and produces heat. When the cell cools down, it rejuvenates a bit, but not to any great extent. There is some life left, but the voltage drop makes it less than ideal.
I just checked the Energizer web site and the revised numbers for the D cells are a rated capacity of 20.500 Ah when tested at 0.025 amps. This drops down to about 7.000 Ah when tested at 1.0 amp.
Now we just need to find a light that draws only 0.025 amps and we will be set for some long run time. It would run for about 820 hours.
Tom
Interesting questions...
I believe the answer has to do with heat. At higher current drains, the internal resistance of the cell uses up the chemistry and produces heat. When the cell cools down, it rejuvenates a bit, but not to any great extent. There is some life left, but the voltage drop makes it less than ideal.
I just checked the Energizer web site and the revised numbers for the D cells are a rated capacity of 20.500 Ah when tested at 0.025 amps. This drops down to about 7.000 Ah when tested at 1.0 amp.
Now we just need to find a light that draws only 0.025 amps and we will be set for some long run time. It would run for about 820 hours.
Tom
I have found that a 4led array driven at less than 2ma to be of little use for light so I don't think you will get useful light for less than 1ma from a 2 alkaline cell in series combination. I figure 1ma from a boost circuit on a single D cell at 50% efficiency will probably yield about 9000mah or about 375 days.
The major problem with alkalines is voltage sag. They are useful until they hit about 1.2 volts because compared to nimh they have a higher starting voltage thus requiring less amps to power the same device so as long as the voltage doesn't sag the cell under light loads has more capacity than most nimh. If you had a regulated device that would run at 0.5v it could be alkalines would be great as at that voltage after recovering most cells have almost no capacity left to give. I find flashamp testing on alkaline AAs at that voltage to run less than 100ma which equates to about 3% capacity left. Perhaps a buck converter that switches to direct drive driven by about 5AA cells could sip almost every ounce out of the batteries when driving LEDs.
The major problem with alkalines is voltage sag. They are useful until they hit about 1.2 volts because compared to nimh they have a higher starting voltage thus requiring less amps to power the same device so as long as the voltage doesn't sag the cell under light loads has more capacity than most nimh. If you had a regulated device that would run at 0.5v it could be alkalines would be great as at that voltage after recovering most cells have almost no capacity left to give. I find flashamp testing on alkaline AAs at that voltage to run less than 100ma which equates to about 3% capacity left. Perhaps a buck converter that switches to direct drive driven by about 5AA cells could sip almost every ounce out of the batteries when driving LEDs.
DavidH
Newly Enlightened
Thanks for the great work! I've been using the Ray o Vac Max for a while and have been very happy with them, I guess your graphs show I made a good choice. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif
I can't wait to see the CR123A tests, I think the Sanyo's are pretty good.
I can't wait to see the CR123A tests, I think the Sanyo's are pretty good.
jayflash
Flashlight Enthusiast
Welcome to the CPF, krisco. Gald to have you here and be sure to join right in. Let us in on your experiences and purchases. Later! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink2.gif
