All my eneloop XX 2500 mAh batteries dropping like flies

MidnightDistortions

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
1,229
Location
Illinois, United States
My ones are Sanyo HR3UWXA min 2400 mah- date code 12-02A T. My wrappers started to peel along the seem also. As i wrote before, these would of had 12 charges max [prob less] and charged with the same charger as my normal eneloops [prob 30+ recharges] which all look and perform as new. Any one else have XX,s crap out?

The only thing i can think of is you had them in a device and they kept discharging past 0.9 volts. In my experience any device that runs the batteries totally flat go bad. They don't always reverse charge but the ones that do won't work anymore. The ones that go flat can eat up a lot of cycles. My suggestion is if you do not have a multimeter to get one and do some testing on those other cells in the device you had them in to check the voltage. Best to back track and redo the tests the best way you remember how you had the cells. If you left them in a device unused, the device may still be draining the cells (normally at a slow enough rate not to be a huge concern) such as a flashlight that will continually drain the cells at a slow rate.

I'd consider going below 0.9V to be a deep discharge. Having said that, in other testing that I've been doing, the results are indicating that even regularly discharging down to only 0.9V does cumulative damage to the cells - even for regular Eneloops. I've got a pair of Eneloops that I've been discharging down to only 1.1V and they've done a lot more cycles than in any other test that I've run:

http://www.ultrasmartcharger.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=91

My recommendation these days is that if you want your cells to last, you should charge them early - before they go completely flat - as long as your charger isn't damaging the cells by overcharging them.

If your charger is overcharging the cells, i'd get rid of that charger for one that will not overcharge the cells. Eneloop Pro's doesn't specify how long they hold a charge for 3 years or 5 years. I'm curious if there's any testing done on this. I actually consider anything under 1.1 volts deeply discharged. Usually i'll try to recharge the cells at 1.22-1.26 volts and then refresh them every 6-12 months but sometimes i forget to check the voltage and the cells are around 1 volt and need recharging. It seems especially for the pros it's not a good idea to run them all the way down. I also hear of PowerEx 2700mAh cells only lasting a couple of years, but there are people who say they have been using the cells for 6 years and they still work so i'm guessing that the ones who are still using those cells for 6 years must not use them much or recharge them before they get below 1.1 volts.

Also i am curious as to maybe these cells should not be fully charged (when put into storage) that they should only be partially charged (or partially discharged) to avoid the high IR. I know on traditional HSD NiMH cells leaving those in a charged state without use will increase the IR on them. I've run into some cheap cells that have been fully charged a few times and not put in use that have developed high IR, it might be a good idea to leave them with a 40% charge (or maybe less) when put into storage. I think testing this would help some people out that have Eneloop Pro cells. Regular Eneloops i don't think it will make much of a difference but should not be topped off if they are not being used much. This also makes it more apparent that i wanted to use some AAA to AA adapters on low drain devices where AAA cells would be more beneficial in clocks or other low drain devices as they don't hold as much capacity and the cells are a bit cheaper.

As for using high capacity cells, the experiences i had with them degrading, they'll degrade faster if they were completely discharged past 0.9 volts. The only suggestion i can consider if you absolutely need those cells running is to get a charger other than the c9000 which doesn't completely charge the cells unless you let them sit on there for 2 hours or more past the 'done' stage. On top of that on completely depleted cells a slower charge rate imo is better as you will get a more complete charge because Eneloops are usually charged up to 1.55 volts and i don't think the 2 hour top off is enough for the Pros to be considered fully charged. 1000mA on the C9000 for Eneloop Pros might not be a good idea, i would probably choose 500mA, less if cells were discharged under 0.9 volts. I don't have a set of Eneloop Pros (AA) to effectively test this theory out, i could try the Duraloops out to see how much capacity is lost to a possible premature cutoff. The C9000 appears to charge Eneloops and i'll choose the 1A when the cells are around 1.26 volts but as the voltage is lower, i tend to lower the charge rate as well.
 

Power Me Up

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
634
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I actually consider anything under 1.1 volts deeply discharged.

I suspect that you're referring to the unloaded voltage? If the resting voltage is only 1.1V, I'd agree that the cells has been deeply discharged. In the test that I've done where the cells are being discharged down to 1.1V, that voltage is being measured under load which is quite a different thing to measuring the voltage without a load.

The C9000 appears to charge Eneloops and i'll choose the 1A when the cells are around 1.26 volts but as the voltage is lower, i tend to lower the charge rate as well.

I'm curious as to why you think that it's necessary to lower the charging voltage when cells are more deeply discharged?
 

MidnightDistortions

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
1,229
Location
Illinois, United States
I'm curious as to why you think that it's necessary to lower the charging voltage when cells are more deeply discharged?

The C9000 only charges up to 1.47 volts, regular Eneloops seem fine while there might be more capacity within 1.47 volts and 1.55 volts then what the 2 hour top off charge can really do. I'm actually going to run a test on my Duraloops to see if the C9000 undercharges those cells.
 

Power Me Up

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
634
Location
Brisbane, Australia
The C9000 only charges up to 1.47 volts, regular Eneloops seem fine while there might be more capacity within 1.47 volts and 1.55 volts then what the 2 hour top off charge can really do. I'm actually going to run a test on my Duraloops to see if the C9000 undercharges those cells.


Sorry - I don't follow you there. I agree that Eneloops aren't normally full at 1.47V but I don't see the relevance of that to the charging rate needing to be different for different depths of discharge?
 

WalkIntoTheLight

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
3,967
Location
Canada
I'd consider going below 0.9V to be a deep discharge. Having said that, in other testing that I've been doing, the results are indicating that even regularly discharging down to only 0.9V does cumulative damage to the cells - even for regular Eneloops. I've got a pair of Eneloops that I've been discharging down to only 1.1V and they've done a lot more cycles than in any other test that I've run:

http://www.ultrasmartcharger.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=91

My recommendation these days is that if you want your cells to last, you should charge them early - before they go completely flat - as long as your charger isn't damaging the cells by overcharging them.

After looking at your graphs again, how do you know that it's the "deep discharge" that is causing shorter cycle life? In your above graph, you're only discharging to 1.1v, but you're also only charging to 1.44v, which is well below a full charge. Is it possible that charging to full is reducing cycle life, and not the discharge down to 0.9v?
 

MidnightDistortions

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
1,229
Location
Illinois, United States
Sorry - I don't follow you there. I agree that Eneloops aren't normally full at 1.47V but I don't see the relevance of that to the charging rate needing to be different for different depths of discharge?

If the Eneloops on the C9000 reaches full around 90%, the 2 hour top off charge should fully or near fully charge those Eneloops. My theory is that Eneloop Pros would reach the 2 hour top off point at 85% and wouldn't be able to fully charge the cells at the 2 hour top off. The more current that is used to charge a battery the higher the voltage will be. I've noticed voltage will be slightly higher with depleted cells versus those that have only been partially drained. I could be wrong though but normally even with the regular Eneloops, if i fully discharged them i would just charge them at 500mA to ensure they got a full recharge. If i charge them while there's 30% charge left or more the higher i'll put the charge rate.
 

SilverFox

Flashaholic
Joined
Jan 19, 2003
Messages
12,449
Location
Bellingham WA
Hello MidnightDistortions,

Since capacity is determined through discharge you can verify your ideas by doing a discharge test.

Charge your cells keeping track of the charging current and if you set a timer for 15 minute intervals you can also note the peak voltage reached during the 2 hour top off charge. Then remove the cell from the charger and let them rest for 2 hours, then do your discharge test.

Tom
 

Power Me Up

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
634
Location
Brisbane, Australia
After looking at your graphs again, how do you know that it's the "deep discharge" that is causing shorter cycle life? In your above graph, you're only discharging to 1.1v, but you're also only charging to 1.44v, which is well below a full charge. Is it possible that charging to full is reducing cycle life, and not the discharge down to 0.9v?

From that test alone, it's not possible to say which is causing the cells to last longer. I've got 2 more tests running at the moment - one charging with inflection termination and then discharging down to 1.1V and another charging to 1.44V and discharging to 0.9V - I haven't yet published the results, but so far it looks like both are a factor in increasing the cell life.
 

Power Me Up

Enlightened
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Messages
634
Location
Brisbane, Australia
I've noticed voltage will be slightly higher with depleted cells versus those that have only been partially drained.

I've just had a look through some historical charging data for some of my Eneloops and although I can see variations in the charging end voltage, there doesn't appear to be a direct correlation between depth of discharge and final voltage. In quite a few cases, when cells discharged more, the end voltage was lower, but I also found cases where it was higher.

I suspect that other factors such as the ambient temperature come into play.

In the end, I would say that depth of discharge may or may not have an effect on the end voltage - if it does, it doesn't appear to be enough that it overcomes all of the other factors to the point where it consistently causes higher end voltages... With enough testing, it might be possible to show that there is a statistical difference, but in the mean time, I wouldn't be too concerned by it...
 

WalkIntoTheLight

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
3,967
Location
Canada
From that test alone, it's not possible to say which is causing the cells to last longer. I've got 2 more tests running at the moment - one charging with inflection termination and then discharging down to 1.1V and another charging to 1.44V and discharging to 0.9V - I haven't yet published the results, but so far it looks like both are a factor in increasing the cell life.

Looking forward to your results.
 

MidnightDistortions

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
1,229
Location
Illinois, United States
I've just had a look through some historical charging data for some of my Eneloops and although I can see variations in the charging end voltage, there doesn't appear to be a direct correlation between depth of discharge and final voltage. In quite a few cases, when cells discharged more, the end voltage was lower, but I also found cases where it was higher.

I suspect that other factors such as the ambient temperature come into play.

In the end, I would say that depth of discharge may or may not have an effect on the end voltage - if it does, it doesn't appear to be enough that it overcomes all of the other factors to the point where it consistently causes higher end voltages... With enough testing, it might be possible to show that there is a statistical difference, but in the mean time, I wouldn't be too concerned by it...

Yeah it looks like you might be right about the voltage thing...

This is the results from the testing i did.

1st Charged at 1000mA
1.44 v (IR test - 1.51v)
Discharged at 1000mA
2266 / 2272 / 2295 / 2287


2nd Charged at 1000mA
1.45-1.46 v(IR test - 1.42v)
(2307 / 2400 / 2472 / 2423)


Discharged at 1000mA
2333 / 2338 / 2365 / 2354


3rd Charge at 500mA
1.46 (IR test - 1.45v)
2258 / 2348 / 2420 / 2380


Discharged at 1000mA
2376 / 2384 / 2401 / 2385

I'm not sure if that makes much of a difference from charging at 500mA or at 1000mA, however i did let the cells rest for an hour or two. I averaged out the IR test, they were slightly higher the 3rd time but lower than the initial charge which only added about 300mAh into the cells so they were fairly charged. I bought these cells (Duracell Ion Core, 2400mAh) a year ago and so far they are holding up well. I did also want to mention the ambient temp was about 74F with fans going and the cells never got above 105F.

I think there is some sort of issue if the Eneloop Pros start dying after a couple of years. Heat might be a factor, even though the C9000 does dissipate heat well.
 

marcosg

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
129
Location
Maryland
In March 2014 I purchased a pack of 8 new eneloop XXs (4HR‐3UWX) from "large online retailer" (before Panasonic rebranding).

I have been using my Maha MH-C9000 to charge them at 1000ma for the past 16 months. I use all 8 batteries and then recharge them, so they are getting even wear.

Within the last week, my C9000 reported 'High' on 4 batteries. I estimate they have been charged only 60-70 times (they should handle 500 charges). The ones that are still "OK" are looking pretty tired in my flashlight fresh off the charger.

I tried C9000's "Refresh Analyze" - and as last resort "Break in", both to no avail (unit says "High" for failed batteries, ~1850-1900mAH for surviving ones).

Is it possible I charged them too quickly @1000mA? Thats less than 0.5C so I thought it would be OK. But the Panasonic BQ-CC17 charges at 300mA.

Thanks

My Eneloops XX are also doing the same thing. Purchased them about 2 years ago (2 packs of 8) and they probably have about 100 to 120 cycles.
They are the original ones from Japan and I also use the C9000 at the same rate as you.
Only the Lacrosse BC1000 and the Opus BT-2000 will charger them.
The Maha C9000 and the Panasonic chargers won't charge them. I have no problems with my regular Eneloops that I purchased years before.
 

ChrisGarrett

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
5,726
Location
Miami, Florida
My Eneloops XX are also doing the same thing. Purchased them about 2 years ago (2 packs of 8) and they probably have about 100 to 120 cycles.
They are the original ones from Japan and I also use the C9000 at the same rate as you.
Only the Lacrosse BC1000 and the Opus BT-2000 will charger them.
The Maha C9000 and the Panasonic chargers won't charge them. I have no problems with my regular Eneloops that I purchased years before.

Not the Eneloop Pros, but the Duracell Ion Core 2450s. Bought 4 back in late '13 and did the break-in on my C9000s. Then I bought two more quads a year or so later. These don't have close to 50 cycles on any quad and have been used in moderation.

The other day, I went break-in the first quad (1-4) and 3 finished, but one didn't. I tried a few things and it wouldn't even take a discharge at 300mA. I put it in the recycle bag, just chalking it up to finally a 'dead' cell. This one wouldn't even read high, it just wouldn't discharge.

So I'm leaving my GF's place today, where I've kept batteries 5-8 in a SWM D40A and took them home to break-in (I'm going through my AAs before hurricane season scales up and the first one in the C9000s, shuts the BI process down. I tried a few times and same deal. Doesn't even start the process on BI, or even 'charge' and doesn't discharge but for a second before DONE.

I tried another and figured that this quad is like the other one--just bad batteries. I have them charging up on my LaCrosse BC-700 and when they're done (and they're charging fine at 500mA), I'll do a discharge on them and then on my BT-3400 v. 2.2 and see what I see, but it's not looking good. They're at least 3 years old, but not a lot of cycles.

Chris
 

tatasal

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
1,192
I don't know with your experiences guys but in my experience with LSD AA cells, only the Eneloop 2000mah has survived and are surviving until now and retaining almost its original capacities...... while my higher capacity, whether the Eneloop Pros or my Powerex Imedion 2450s are all retired, way below the regular Eneloop in cycles.
 

AA Cycler

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
55
Not the Eneloop Pros, but the Duracell Ion Core 2450s ... C9000s ... LaCrosse BC-700 ... BT-3400 v. 2.2 ...

Charge all of them on BC-700, then read their internal resistance using BT-3400. I bet the ones causing problems will read above 2000 mOhms.

Recycle the cells that read above 1000 mOhm. A good replacement is BPI 2400, they will eventually fail as well, but are cheaper to get.

Cheers,
AA Cycler
 
Last edited:

WalkIntoTheLight

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
3,967
Location
Canada
I have almost 400 AA and AAA Eneloops, some dating back to 2006. They're all regulars, and the only ones that are showing signs of significant wear are ones that I overheated in a light that gets way too hot. I think this thread is a good reminder to me: stick to the regular Eneloops, not the Pros.

That said, I have many in their original packages that I haven't touched. I think the oldest are around 4 or 5 years. I should get some of these out and test them to make sure they are still good. Perhaps Eneloops require occasional use to stay healthy? I haven't heard that is necessary, but I suppose it's possible.

Many of my Eneloops in current usage only get charged every year or two (they're in low drain things like remotes and clocks). They're still fine, and that doesn't seem too much different than letting them sit in a drawer unused.
 

ChrisGarrett

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
5,726
Location
Miami, Florida
Charge all of them on BC-700, then read their internal resistance using BT-3400. I bet the ones causing problems will read above 2000 mOhms.

Recycle the cells that read above 1000 mOhm. A good replacement is BPI 2400, they will eventually fail as well, but are cheaper to get.

Cheers,
AA Cycler

Normally, I'll see the IRs creep up in normal charging, so I'm aware of where things are, even if it's just a faint memory. These actually surprised me, as the first one didn't trigger any high IR alert and didn't shut down the charger. Then this quad (#2) was rejected outright. I did get them to slow charge on the BC-700, then I did a discharge on the Opus BT-3400 and got ~2200mAh out of the four, but I wasn't able to get them to discharge at the 700mA rate on the Opus, rather they hung around the 475mA-525mA level, which is fine.

They're in my RF wireless keyboard right now and I'll just leave them there.

I've used NiMH enough over 2+ decades to know things go south on us, but low I.R.s aren't always the sole indicator.

For me, the moral of the story is: if you're going to use hi-cap HSD-ish batteries, use them and abuse them quickly and then don't jump off of the roof when you have to replace them after a couple/few years. Also, cycles don't seem to be the de facto measure for a battery's health.

Chris
 

Gauss163

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 20, 2013
Messages
1,604
Location
USA
Just as for Li-ion, it may be possible to extend life (= cumulative Ah) of high-capacity Eneloops by doing shallower (dis)charges. Indeed, some of AACycler's results (e.g. here and here) seem to imply that shallower cycles can greatly reduce the growth of IR so prolong life. But these tests were for Varta 2100's not Eneloops. It would be interesting to see what gains might be had doing similar for high-capacity Eneloops, i.e. not fully charging them (for that AACyler used 1.48V voltage termination vs 0dv or -dv) and/or using higher discharge termination voltage (e.g. 1.0V vs. 0.9V). I wonder how they would compare to the lower capacity eneloops if used at the same lower capacity, or half-way between the two, e.g. 2200mAh.
 
Last edited:
Top