# Maha MH-C9000, the Wizard One Charger (Part 2)



## Sigman (Sep 11, 2007)

...continued from here.


----------



## dtsoll (Sep 15, 2007)

Hello,
Well, I finally purchased a C9000 and have searched the other thread and cannot find anything on this problem I'm having. When I put AAA's in the charger they "kinda" pop back out. Must be something I am doing. I know I read something about this somewhere but cannot find anything. Anyone else have this happen to them? What am I doing wrong? Doug


----------



## edc3 (Sep 15, 2007)

Are you inserting them negative end first? AA's are inserted positive end first and AAA's negative end first.


----------



## Power Me Up (Sep 15, 2007)

dtsoll said:


> Hello,
> Well, I finally purchased a C9000 and have searched the other thread and cannot find anything on this problem I'm having. When I put AAA's in the charger they "kinda" pop back out. Must be something I am doing. I know I read something about this somewhere but cannot find anything. Anyone else have this happen to them? What am I doing wrong? Doug



You're definitely not alone there.

Although it definitely helps to put the negative end of AAA cells in first, it isn't the solution to the problem. Slot 2 on my 0G0B01 chargers are pretty bad for this, although I've also had the problem in other slots as well. My earlier 0FAB02 charger doesn't have this problem at all.

I think the problem is either to do with the moulding of the plastic shell, or the location of the negative probe itself - the negative ends of the cells are tending to sit either on the ramp (and won't hold in at all) or they're sitting right on the edge and prone to pop out - usually after only a second or so if not straight away, but also sometimes after a while.

Generally, you can persevere until they stay in, but it is a pain...


----------



## TorchBoy (Sep 15, 2007)

I've had an AAA cell or two pop out several times recently on just one particular slot, but never until the last few days. I'm not sure if it's the slot or the plastic wrapper on the cell being just slightly scrunched around the negative end at one point. But that shouldn't be enough to do it. Bad design I guess.


----------



## the_snark (Sep 19, 2007)

Hi all, noooobie to CPF here. Thanks for all the info.

I am thinking of buying a C9000 and have read a lot of the posts here as well as downloading the 2-page instruction sheet. I have some further Q's that you helpful people may be able to assist with:

I want to run it in my car sometimes. Can I use a simple cigarette lighter cable that I can make for a couple of dollars, or is some sort of voltage regulator required in the adaptor? When the engine is running, the car's voltage will be more like 14V. I can't see car adaptors sold separately on the Australian distributor's site (http://servaas.com.au), though the Maha C401FS comes bundled with one.

Speaking of the C401FS - *if* I don't care about the info that the C9000's display gives me, would the C401FS perform any worse than the 9000 for basic charging, battery longevity, etc? I haven't decided how battery geeky I want to be yet, i.e. whether I want break-in etc. (No offence intended - I'll probably go geeky!) The 401's smaller size is appealing.

I gather that if I want non-default charging rates, I need to program these for each cell, and every time I charge. Is this correct? I will probably use the 1A default most of the time as that seems reasonable, unless I need to charge in a hurry.

Using Eneloops or ordinary NiMHs, does fast charging (e.g. using a cheaper 1 hour "fast charger") reduce long term battery life? There is so much conflicting info on batteries. Is the occasional charge at 2000mA in the C9000 going to hurt my 2000mAh Eneloops (i.e. 1.0 C)?

Thanks!


----------



## TorchBoy (Sep 19, 2007)

the_snark said:


> Hi all, noooobie to CPF here.


:welcome:

No offence, but, um, how do we know you're not a boojum? 



the_snark said:


> I want to run it in my car sometimes. Can I use a simple cigarette lighter cable that I can make for a couple of dollars, or is some sort of voltage regulator required in the adaptor?


Good question. I've got a 12V adaptor with lots of different plugs and voltage settings but it says it's only 800mA. Would it still work on slow charges?



the_snark said:


> Using Eneloops or ordinary NiMHs, does fast charging (e.g. using a cheaper 1 hour "fast charger") reduce long term battery life?


Not so you'd notice with better chargers. With cheap chargers that don't terminate at the right time, quite possibly.



the_snark said:


> Is the occasional charge at 2000mA in the C9000 going to hurt my 2000mAh Eneloops (i.e. 1.0 C)?


No. The C9000 is a good charger, and SilverFox even recommends fast rates like that. Allow time for the 2 hours of top-up charge if you want them fully charged though.


----------



## Power Me Up (Sep 23, 2007)

dtsoll said:


> Hello,
> Well, I finally purchased a C9000 and have searched the other thread and cannot find anything on this problem I'm having. When I put AAA's in the charger they "kinda" pop back out. Must be something I am doing.


As a follow up on what I've already said:

I just bought some Uniross Hybrio AAA cells and I've found that the newer revision C9000s that I've got don't detect the cells even if they do stay in the slot without popping out. The older unit is testing them just fine though. (Actually I did get one cell to detect in one slot of one of the chargers, but it didn't work very well and stopped discharging after only a few minutes)

I'd say that this is because the Hybrios have their wrapper coming a bit further around the corner on the negative terminal and the newer chargers are only making contact right on the edge - the negative terminals on the Eneloops are exposed all the way to the edge, so they still work OK in the newer C9000s.

I wonder if they've fixed this problem in the even more recent C9000s?


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 23, 2007)

Hello Power Me Up,

I seem to remember something about a slight "tweak" of the AAA contacts on the "improved" units. I just checked a small variety of AAA cells that I have with a newer C-9000 and there were no issues at all.

Tom


----------



## Power Me Up (Sep 23, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Power Me Up,
> 
> I seem to remember something about a slight "tweak" of the AAA contacts on the "improved" units. I just checked a small variety of AAA cells that I have with a newer C-9000 and there were no issues at all.


Which "improved" version are you talking about? I've got the 0G0B01 versions as my newer units...


----------



## jezzyp (Sep 23, 2007)

I have the same problem on bay 3. AAA just pops out. The other 3 bays are fine.
I have tried different ways of inserting and had a close look at the terminals but can't see anything wrong.

I have emailed Nevada Radio here in the UK where I bought it to arrange a awap as its only 6 months old.


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 23, 2007)

Hello Power Me Up,

My newest unit is a 0G0E01.

Tom


----------



## Power Me Up (Sep 23, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> My newest unit is a 0G0E01.


Just out of curiosity, how many C9000s do you have?


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 23, 2007)

Hello Power Me Up,

I currently have 2.

Tom


----------



## Tubor (Sep 23, 2007)

Mine is fine with some eneloops I've just bought. I had some jumping problems with some Maplin AAA's (a shop to avoid if possible) but it was OK if re-inserted firmly and carefully.


----------



## Codeman (Sep 24, 2007)

My 0G0D01 hasn't had any problems with AAA's, nor did my earlier 0FAB02, once I learned to insert them negative end first.


----------



## PJbatman (Sep 24, 2007)

I just noticed this newer Part2 thread, so I am re-posting because I am curious to see any feedback on my thoughts on the unit so far (I just got it a few days ago..)


I recently received my C9000 (0G0B01 revision) from ThomasDist and absolutely love it!!
I thought I would share my idea for a "best of both worlds" charging technique... I start with discharged cells (~2yr old 2000 mah AA for my first test), charge them @ 1C (2 A) with a cooling fan, let them sit for ~30 minutes for topoff charge, cool for a few minutes, then charge them again at 0.2C (400 ma). The reason I like this method is that it can be fairly quick, but also gets them very full. I tested this first charge test by letting them cool a few minutes and then discharging them at 400 ma and 3 of the cells discharged ~97% rated capacity! The last one just isnt done yet and I needed to use the charger for my next set, so I took it out, but it looked like it was tracking towards the same good result. 
I have always seen the drawback to fast (1C) charging was that the cells would just not get full, even if the peak detection work perfectly. So, that is why I like the 1C, followed by 0.2C approach. If I recall correctly, the 1C charges input ~1900 mah and the 0.2C charges put in another 350 mah...
My background is in RC cars for several years. My general thoughts on nimh charging are that peak detection charging is definitely a precision business and having trustworthy equipment is a must, like this unit. I think slow (0.1C) non-peak detectection will generally lead to longer runtime and overall life, but, it is no where near as fun or as precise as peak detection... The higher the charge rate in peak detection, the higher the voltage will be under load, and the charging process will be faster, but properly detecting the peak is more important. When charging my 2000 mah cells in this unit at both 1C and 0.2C, I feel like it was doing a great job detecting the peak, and not significantly overcharging...
I now, have 4 of my new 2850 mah Ansmann cells in for a break in cycle at 270 ma and I plan to pull them out after ~16 hrs. I discharged them 1A and then again at 0.4A to get them totally empty. 

I am very passionate about my batteries...now, I just need to create some plastic dowel adapters, so I can charge my 4200mah subC monster truck cells, too bad it has 14 cells and I could really use (3) more C9000s...

Take care guys and thanks for the great thread on this machine!


----------



## Burgess (Sep 25, 2007)

to *SilverFox* --


Just received my Maha C9000 charger today, from Thomas Dist.


My date-code is *0G0D01*.


Should i be concerned / upset about this ?


Thank you for any info.

:candle:

_


----------



## TPA (Sep 25, 2007)

Burgess said:


> to *SilverFox* --
> 
> 
> Just received my Maha C9000 charger today, from Thomas Dist.
> ...



I received my C9000 last week and it also is a 0G0D01. I would have thought Thomas Distributing to have the latest versions of these chargers considering they're probably one of the top places selling them. I'd still love to know the differences between each version # myself.


----------



## PJbatman (Sep 25, 2007)

It is really odd that my MH-C9000 from Thomas Dist just last week is a 0G0B01... My biggest concern after reading most of this thread was that it might miss termination at the lower charge rates, and mine has been perfect on my first few ~2000 mah batts(new and old) that I charged at 400 ma, so now I really don't want to chance trading in on a different unit...

Maybe I ended up with the older unit due to having to call them to manually change my order...I had originally ordered a LaCrosse BC-900, but then a few hours later, found the C9000 and definitely wanted to switch... I think what threw me off was that the thomas site search for AA chargers (last week) was not showing the C9000, only the BC-900, but I see that it is fixed now.


----------



## Power Me Up (Sep 25, 2007)

PJbatman said:


> It is really odd that my MH-C9000 from Thomas Dist just last week is a 0G0B01... My biggest concern after reading most of this thread was that it might miss termination at the lower charge rates


The version that you've got includes the improved charge termination algorithm - it's only the versions starting with 0F that had that problem.


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 25, 2007)

Hello Burgess,

If your charger works properly, I don't see any reason to be concerned. The original release of the C-9000 worked very well with healthy cells. The "improvements" were added because a large number of people were trying to use and recover "crap" cells.  

This is not entirely true, but you get my drift...

In order to check out your unit, you will need to find a source of crap cells, because it is harder to get healthy cells to malfunction. 

[sarcastic mode on]
You may be able to borrow some cells from a friend or neighbor that leaves them on the charger 24/7 to make sure they are always ready to go. This is one of the best ways to turn a healthy cell into a crap cell. The other source is to find cells that have been thrown into the back of the junk drawer. These are cells that stopped working well a while ago and were tossed into the back of the drawer instead of the recycle bin, hoping for a miracle to bring them back to life.
[sarcastic mode off]

To test your unit, you need to charge at the lowest charge rate, and set a timer. The charge should terminate after around 120-140% of the cells capacity has been put back in. The timer is a back up for you to terminate the charge if necessary.

The other issue is that the charger heats up when charging 4 cells at 2 amps. It is best to run this test with cells that are broken in and have been in constant use (i.e. NOT crap cells). Charge a set of 4 cells at 2 amps and check the temperature of the cells at the end of the charge. The cells should stay below around 140 F. Temperature is monitored at the negative end of the cell, so make sure your cells have good contact with the temperature monitoring strip when doing this test. This is not a test to run on new cells, or cells that have been in storage, until they have been properly broken in. The charger heats up while charging at 2 amps and some of this heat is passed on to the cells. If the cells are in a questionable condition, they will also heat up during a charge at this rate, and the combination can overheat the cells, sometimes melting the shrink wrap and sometimes causing the cell to vent. In the improved units, thermal paste has been applied to the junction of the temperature probe and the metal band that contacts the battery for better heat transfer.

My cells run up to around 120 - 130 F during 2 amp charging.

If everything checks out and works well, you are good to go.

Tom


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 25, 2007)

Hello Power Me Up,

Just to further confuse things, I have a 0F "improved" unit...  

Tom


----------



## NiOOH (Sep 25, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Power Me Up,
> 
> Just to further confuse things, I have a 0F "improved" unit...
> 
> Tom


 
Tom, what do you think is the primary termination criteria on the improved unit. It looks like my 0G0E01 unit terminates on maxV set to 1.47V (or 1.48V actuallysince i could see it hitting 1.47V mark and staying there for a minute or two).
I posted a separate thread about this, but no one cared to comment.


----------



## PJbatman (Sep 25, 2007)

I am just curious if anyone knows exactly what they have changed between the 0G0B01 and 0G0E01 versions, other than making the temperature sensing more accurate.


----------



## PJbatman (Sep 25, 2007)

NiOOH, Maybe there is something totally different about AA Nimhs, but in my experience charging sub-C Nimhs, peak detection is never controlled by a particular max voltage. It is always controlled by a combination of voltage drop (in the range of a few thousandths of a volt) over time and cell temperature increase. I have had some of my better AA cells get to 1.50V at the end of a 2A charge.

One improvement idea for the the C9000 would be to have it display the voltage to a thousandth of a volt, and display it continuously during charging...


----------



## NiOOH (Sep 25, 2007)

PJbatman said:


> NiOOH, Maybe there is something totally different about AA Nimhs, but in my experience charging sub-C Nimhs, peak detection is never controlled by a particular max voltage. It is always controlled by a combination of voltage drop (in the range of a few thousandths of a volt) over time and cell temperature increase. I have had some of my better AA cells get to 1.50V at the end of a 2A charge.
> 
> One improvement idea for the the C9000 would be to have it display the voltage to a thousandth of a volt, and display it continuously during charging...


PJbatman, I am not arguing against that, quite the opposite actually. In my experience the peak voltage depends on charging current, ambient temperature and the state of health of the battery.
That is why I find it interesting that my unit allways (no matter what cells and charging current I select) terminates the quick charge about a minute after the cells show 1.47V
I have a reason to believe that it terminates on maxV as I explained here
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/175531


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 25, 2007)

Hello NiOOH,

I believe the C-9000 utilizes -dV termination. The difference between the original and the improved units has to do with the method of detection and the -dV value. I also believe there is a peak voltage cut off, but I think it is set to 1.6 - 1.7 volts. The display during charging shows the resting voltage and not the voltage under load, so that may explain why you often see 1.47 volts at the end of the charge. 

I have not checked this, but it would be interesting to charge some NiCd cells and see if you get the same voltage at the end of the charge. NiCd cells usually terminate at a higher voltage than NiMh cells.

Tom


----------



## mostro (Sep 25, 2007)

I received my Wizard today from Thomas Distributing, and like PJbatman got revision 0G0B01.

Say, for instance, my, uh, neighbor had some of those crap cells he wanted to to miraculously bring back to life. I guess it would be wise to monitor the temperatures as Tom posted above.

Any reason to consider exchanging for a more recent iteration?


----------



## GaryF (Sep 25, 2007)

I managed to resist this for so long, but in a moment of weakness today I placed an order with Thomas Distribution for the MH-C9000.


----------



## NiOOH (Sep 26, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello NiOOH,
> 
> I believe the C-9000 utilizes -dV termination. The difference between the original and the improved units has to do with the method of detection and the -dV value. I also believe there is a peak voltage cut off, but I think it is set to 1.6 - 1.7 volts. The display during charging shows the resting voltage and not the voltage under load, so that may explain why you often see 1.47 volts at the end of the charge.
> 
> ...


 
Tom,
If you read what I reported in this thread 
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/175531
you will see that there is a reason to believe that the peak voltage and much the less -dV is not reached during fast charging. Currently, I do not have any NiCd cells to try it with, but the fact that fast charge is terminated at 1.47V and the cells rearch 1.49V during top-off is strange.
It is true that the charger reports the offline voltage, i.e. with no load, but as far as I know the termination is also based on this measurement, i.e. the charger "looks" for -dV signal also offline. I agree that the voltage under the charge pulse will be higher (how much higher depends on the IR of the cell), but as long as the termination is based on offline voltage reading nothing is changed.
I also find it interesting that the charger cuts at 1.47V no matter what cells and chaging currents are selected. Older cells with higher IR typically run at higher voltages. Higher charging rates also bumps the voltage towards the end of charge. My BC900 and CCrane before that showed this higher voltages, but the c9000 is always terminating at 1.47V. Isn't that strange? You can check it for yourself. Take a 2Ah cell and charge it at 500 mA. Watch the display for the lasdt couple of minutes before done. Discharge and charge the same cell at 1.5-2 Amps and watch again. On my c9000 in both cases the charger terinates about a minute after the cell voltage has reached 1.47 V.


----------



## PJbatman (Sep 26, 2007)

mostro said:


> I guess it would be wise to monitor the temperatures as Tom posted above.
> 
> Any reason to consider exchanging for a more recent iteration?


 
It is probably way overkill, but I have been keeping a small cooling fan on mine so far... I charged (4) @ 1.8A last night and they stayed cool. I also charged a few older 2300mah cells at 600 ma and they all perfectly stopped @~2550 mah input (they had all previously rated @ ~2250 on the C9000)
In my experience, the only time I overheated nimh cells was when I was charging a pack of 6 or 7 and they were not matched. The 0G0B01 seems to have a very good peak detection algorithm, and the higher the charge rate, the easier it should be...
But, I guess anything is possible with an older, unknown condition cell...

Bottom line is that you guys are going to love this charger!


----------



## wptski (Sep 26, 2007)

NiOOH said:


> Tom,
> If you read what I reported in this thread
> https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/175531
> you will see that there is a reason to believe that the peak voltage and much the less -dV is not reached during fast charging.


Am I reading this correctly? Voltage doesn't peak and no dip either?? How could it ever work then?


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 26, 2007)

Hello NiOOH,

Interesting...

I charged some NiCd cells. At 1000 mA, the peak voltage displayed on the C-9000 was 1.47 volts, but I did see a 1.48 volt reading once. I then tried charging at 200 mA. The peak voltage displayed when charging at 200 mA was the same 1.47 volts.

Tom


----------



## SilverFox (Sep 26, 2007)

Even more interesting...

I ran another batch of NiCd cells through and this time I had two of them signal Done at 1.54 volts. The other two signaled Done at 1.47 volts.

Tom


----------



## NiOOH (Sep 26, 2007)

I don't have any NiCd cells to try ot with, but with all my AA and AAA NiMH cells (these are in total 25 AA and 6 AAA in differenet capacity, age and condition) my 0G0E01 batch charger never exceeded 1.47V during the fast charge stage.
Wptski,
it could work by simply cutting-of at some predetermined voltage, which is IMO 1.47V. 
In the past I've used two such chargers. One was a Kodak (don't remember the model #) which charged at 300 mA and cut-off around 1.4V It undercharged by about 20%. The other charger that I still own is an even slower overnight charger made by a Chinease company named Konnoc. It charges at 170 mA and cuts off below 1.4 V.
Actually, maxV is the only semi-reliable method to terminate at charging currents below 0.4-0.5C. Usually it is set too low for safety reasons resulting in undercharged cells.


----------



## PJbatman (Oct 10, 2007)

2 interesting MH-C9000 experiences lately...

1) I ordered a second MH-C9000 last week from ThomasDist and it was yet another 0G0B01 model, after I have seen several people report getting 0G0C01, 0G0D01, 0G0E01 .... It is running great though, just like my first one, so I am very happy!
2) On the issue of a particular maxV termination level, I was charging a few nimh AA, I think 2100mah, that were already ~50% charged. They peaked at 1.51V just prior to terminating. I think I was charging at ~1amp...

Have Fun!!


----------



## TPA (Oct 10, 2007)

We know this charger terminates based on voltage and negative delta V, but has anyone considered temperature into the equation? The reason I bring this up is because of the small metal strips about 1/4 up the charging channels. It's obvious they're not there for looks nor do they make contact with the electrical components of the battery, which leads me to believe they're used for measuring temperature. I know Maha is tight lipped about the charging algorithm, but that doesn't mean those of us here can't speculate.


----------



## Codeman (Oct 10, 2007)

No need to speculate. Those are temp sensors. I don't believe they play a part in the charging algorithms, though - they're simply a safety feature.


----------



## TorchBoy (Oct 10, 2007)

PJbatman said:


> They peaked at 1.51V just prior to terminating.


My Eneloop AAAs terminate at 1.51V and hold there for some time after "done" is displayed, presumeably while the top off charge is still going. I normally remove them when the voltage starts to drop again. Just once recently I had one cell increase to 1.52V while being topped off.


----------



## TPA (Oct 11, 2007)

Codeman said:


> No need to speculate. Those are temp sensors. I don't believe they play a part in the charging algorithms, though - they're simply a safety feature.



I have a sneaky feeling they're somehow involved. The 801D charger charges at 2A and doesn't have these present.


----------



## NiOOH (Oct 11, 2007)

PJbatman said:


> 2 interesting MH-C9000 experiences lately...
> 
> 1) I ordered a second MH-C9000 last week from ThomasDist and it was yet another 0G0B01 model, after I have seen several people report getting 0G0C01, 0G0D01, 0G0E01 .... It is running great though, just like my first one, so I am very happy!
> 2) On the issue of a particular maxV termination level, I was charging a few nimh AA, I think 2100mah, that were already ~50% charged. They peaked at 1.51V just prior to terminating. I think I was charging at ~1amp...
> ...


 
I still haven't observed voltages above 1.47V on my 0G0E01 unit. The charger shows "done" 1-2 minutes after the voltage reaches 1.47V Charging at rates een 500 amd 1500 mA. Cells are AA 1700, 2100 and 2000 All Sanyo old school and Eneloop. AAAs are 750 and 800 old school and Eneloops. 
So far, from my obervations, I have no reason to believe that this batch (0G0E01) terminates on other than maxV of 1.47V. I guess there is a -dV onboard but a charger with multiple safety features utilizes whatever comes first to terminate the charge. In my case, maxV is reached before -dV, simply because maxV is set a bit too low. 
I would invite all owners of c9000 units with 0G0E01 serial numbers to observe the peak voltage of their cells. Please mind that this should be the voltage displayed just before done. In some cases, during topoff the voltage can exceed 1.47V. For instance with AA cells towards the end of the topoff the voltage reaches 1.49V and with AAA it is 1.50V.
On the positive side, using this termination my cells stay cool at any charge rate I've used. If I leave them to topoff for 2 hours, I reach about 95% charge completeness with AA cells and 100% with AAA (16 hours at 0.1C sets the 100% mark).


----------



## SilverFox (Oct 11, 2007)

Hello NiOOH,

While your observations are interesting, there are several people who have observed contrary results. I have a lot of cells that terminate at 1.47 volts, but others that go both higher and lower.

Also, I have it on good authority that only one change was made to the C-9000 firmware and that the changes in the serial numbers only refer to lot numbers. 0F was the original model. All units after that should perform the same, since there has been no other improvements. I believe the improvement was made early in February 2007. 

I should also point out that I have observed my Schulze terminating at around 1.47 volts per cell when charging some of my battery packs. 

Perhaps there is just something about 1.47 volts...

Tom


----------



## Burgess (Oct 11, 2007)

Are you guys saying that there is some *benefit* to leaving
the cells on the charger, even *after* it sez "done" ?


Should i simply *leave 'em there* for an extra hour or two ?


Thank you for all this great info !

:goodjob:

_


----------



## TorchBoy (Oct 11, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Also, I have it on good authority that only one change was made to the C-9000 firmware and that the changes in the serial numbers only refer to lot numbers. 0F was the original model. All units after that should perform the same, since there has been no other improvements. I believe the improvement was made early in February 2007.


So what are your thoughts about the claims that another bug has been removed in OGOE01?



Burgess said:


> Are you guys saying that there is some *benefit* to leaving the cells on the charger, even *after* it sez "done" ?
> 
> Should i simply *leave 'em there* for an extra hour or two ?


Yes. Unless you can't be bothered waiting that extra time, or in coming back. They'll still work, just for _slightly_ shorter.


----------



## NiOOH (Oct 12, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello NiOOH,
> 
> Perhaps there is just something about 1.47 volts...
> 
> Tom


 
Hello Tom. 

I doubt that 1.47 V is THE magic number 

I can say that 1.47 V is NOT the peak voltage. As I wrote before, during top-off charge the cells voltage exceeds this value. This leaves me with the strong impression that the charger uses maxV. Now, I could imagine that the maxV value could be somehow connected to the internal resistance of the cell. It is known that cells with higher IR reach higher voltages during charging. It could be that the the charger calculates the value of maxV according to the value of IR from the initial check. My cells are in fairly good shape. For my AAs, I get values from 1.47V to 1.65V during this check. If someone has cells with higher IR that test to about 2.0V when inserted in the c9000 it would be interesting to compare the maxV at the end of charge.


----------



## SilverFox (Oct 12, 2007)

Hello Ian,

Let me see if I can find an answer to that... I just got a new unit and will have to run some tests to see if it repeats digits on slot 1 during cycling.

Tom


----------



## SilverFox (Oct 12, 2007)

Hello NiOOH,

I believe the C-9000 uses peak voltage, or a very small -dV for termination. As I understand it, there is a maximum voltage cut off, but it is around 1.8 - 2.0 volts and is set to prevent you from charging Alkaline cells, should they get by the IR test.

Cells with higher IR will charge to a higher voltage, so we may be able to get a handle on the 1.47 volt number by also observing the IR check number when the cell is first inserted. The problem is that I am not sure what the IR number is. I believe several checks are done, and the number that is displayed is the results of one of those numbers. I am just not sure how that number figures into things.

Tom


----------



## NiOOH (Oct 12, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Ian,
> 
> Let me see if I can find an answer to that... I just got a new unit and will have to run some tests to see if it repeats digits on slot 1 during cycling.
> 
> Tom


 Another one :naughty:! Congrats on the new purchase.
What is the serial number on that one? 
I am still interested on the maxV issue.


----------



## varuscelli (Oct 18, 2007)

PJbatman said:


> 1) I ordered a second MH-C9000 last week from ThomasDist and it was yet another 0G0B01 model, after I have seen several people report getting 0G0C01, 0G0D01, 0G0E01


 
Just to briefly compare notes on models received, I ordered a C9000 from Thomas Distributing on Sept 15 and received the 0G0B01 version.


----------



## rizky_p (Oct 21, 2007)

I have an old firmware C9000 which i bought few months back, i experience several problems that people here are mentioning regarding first firmware such as charge indefinetely(missed charge termination) with below 0.5C but other that all is fine. the question is does the first firmware do the top-off/tricle charge charge after full charge? cause i heard that one of the problem with early firmware it didnt actually doing a tricle charge.

thanks


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 21, 2007)

rizky_p said:


> I have an old firmware C9000 which i bought few months back, i experience several problems that people here are mentioning regarding first firmware such as charge indefinetely(missed charge termination) with below 0.5C but other that all is fine. the question is does the first firmware do the top-off/tricle charge charge after full charge? cause i heard that one of the problem with early firmware it didnt actually doing a tricle charge.



I'm pretty sure that the original C9000 does do a trickle charge after the main charge is completed. Trickle charge on both revisions of the C9000 should be a modulated pulse charge which averages to 10mA.

Because of the changes to the charge termination algorithm with the new revision, cells aren't fully charged at the end of the main charge and so the new revisions of the C9000 performs a 100mA top off charge for 2 hours after the main charge is complete. After that, it then goes to trickle charge mode.

The trickle charge isn't there to bring up the capacity any further - it's just done to counteract any self discharge that the cell would otherwise undergo.


----------



## Burgess (Oct 22, 2007)

Thank you to *Power Me Up* for that info.


:thumbsup:

_


----------



## Dantor (Oct 22, 2007)

I will get one of these, thanks all for your info and comments. It would be nice if it had a usb or serial port to be able to set the exact charge current (currently the specs say you can only do .2 increments on the charge current) and other more detailed/manual settings. 
Will we see deals for the Holidays! Hint Hint


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 22, 2007)

Dantor said:


> I will get one of these, thanks all for your info and comments. It would be nice if it had a usb or serial port to be able to set the exact charge current (currently the specs say you can only do .2 increments on the charge current) and other more detailed/manual settings.
> Will we see deals for the Holidays! Hint Hint



You can actually set the charge current in 100 mA increments (from 200 mA up to 2000 mA)

I agree that a charger with a USB or serial port would be good - although I'd want it for data logging purposes rather than being able to have precise control of charging rates.

MrAl is working on a chip for building a computer controlled DIY charger/tester:
https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/175281

The version he's currently working on won't be able to select the charge/discharge rates at all, but a future version might be able to.


----------



## Dantor (Oct 22, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> You can actually set the charge current in 100 mA increments (from 200 mA up to 2000 mA)
> 
> I agree that a charger with a USB or serial port would be good - although I'd want it for data logging purposes rather than being able to have precise control of charging rates.
> 
> ...



Thank you Power Me Up, very interesting!


----------



## bcwang (Oct 26, 2007)

I recently got an RMA replacement for my c9000 and it is 0G0IA. It doesn't follow the normal batch number convention at all. It is also a black label now instead of white. I wonder if this is extremely new or just different being an RMA unit. I did test charging on both of my units at 500mah with fully charged 2500mah cells and they all terminated quickly. No more fear of burning batteries yay!


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 26, 2007)

bcwang said:


> I recently got an RMA replacement for my c9000 and it is 0G0IA. It doesn't follow the normal batch number convention at all. It is also a black label now instead of white. I wonder if this is extremely new or just different being an RMA unit. I did test charging on both of my units at 500mah with fully charged 2500mah cells and they all terminated quickly. No more fear of burning batteries yay!



It'll be interesting to see if anyone else gets a new unit with that code on it.

Do you know how to reproduce the repeating digits bug? Could you have a go and see if the replacement unit still has that bug?


----------



## Dantor (Oct 26, 2007)

Question "Power Me Up?"

the specs say;
*10 Selectable Charging Currents:* 0.2A, 0.4A, 0.6A, 0.8A, 1.0A, 1.2A, 1.4A, 1.6A, 1.8A, 2.0A ( 2.0A is the same as 2000mA, 0.2A same as 200mA, etc..)
*10 Selectable Discharging Currents:* 0.1A, 0.2A, 0.3A, 0.4A, 0.5A, 0.6A, 0.7A, 0.8A, 0.9A, 1.0A

which shows ".2" -Charging- increments but you say it does 100 mA increments! (you have it, I don't) the reason I ask is eneloops say they work best at .7 charging and I wanted to do it at that. Thx


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 26, 2007)

Dantor said:


> Question "Power Me Up?"
> 
> the specs say;
> *10 Selectable Charging Currents:* 0.2A, 0.4A, 0.6A, 0.8A, 1.0A, 1.2A, 1.4A, 1.6A, 1.8A, 2.0A ( 2.0A is the same as 2000mA, 0.2A same as 200mA, etc..)
> ...



Yep - it definitely allows charging in 100 mA increments. The current specifications on the Maha web site also reflect this:
http://www.mahaenergy.com/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=423&cur=specs#mid

That page does show the discharge termination incorrectly as 1.00 Volts - the current version terminates the discharge at 0.90 Volts under load - the first version terminated discharge at 1.00 Volts open circuit.

As far as charging Eneloops go, I use the default 1000 mA charge rate without any problems. As reported many times by Silverfox, most battery manufacturers recommend charging in the 0.5C to 1.0C range (1000 mA to 2000 mA for AA Eneloops) when doing fast charging. Charging at 700 mA works out to be 0.35C which is not recommended due to the fact that it will give a reduced end of charge signal which can cause the cell to be overcharged and damaged. Probably won't be a problem for some time while the cells are still new and are giving a good end of charge signal, but it might become a problem in the future as the cells age.


----------



## wptski (Oct 26, 2007)

Power Me Up:

Not sure where you came up with the fact that the original version terminated the dicharge at 1V no load but now it's .9V with a load?

A cell will recover when the load is removed, so if it takes down to .9V loaded, what's the no load voltage? Normally over 1V for sure! If the no load voltage is 1V, it may have been taken down to .5, .4, .3 or 0V.

I can't see MAHA making such a mistake like you have stated!

I've tried taking a good ell down so the no load voltage is .9V using a Duratrax ICE, it can't be done, it recovers in less than a second and rises slowly


----------



## Anders (Oct 26, 2007)

"The MH-C9000 uses 1.00V voltage to terminate discharge, but it is the OFFLINE voltage, which is measured with the current turned off. CBA uses the ONLINE voltage which is measured with the current still on. 

You can better match the result if you allow for a 0.05V to 0.10V deviation in the CBA termination voltage (i.e. set it to 0.90 or 0.95V). 

William"

https://www.candlepowerforums.com/threads/148404&highlight=CBA

I don't know if this info is old, from 01-13-2007.


Anders


----------



## wptski (Oct 26, 2007)

Anders said:


> "The MH-C9000 uses 1.00V voltage to terminate discharge, but it is the OFFLINE voltage, which is measured with the current turned off. CBA uses the ONLINE voltage which is measured with the current still on.
> 
> You can better match the result if you allow for a 0.05V to 0.10V deviation in the CBA termination voltage (i.e. set it to 0.90 or 0.95V).
> 
> ...


Your missing the point too! A cell recovers from a load with increased voltage in a split second, therefore if a no load voltage value was/is used the voltage under load would be much lower and it's highly unlikely that MAHA used this as it may damage the cell.

I don't see any point in measuring voltage on the off pulse during discharge. The CBA, DuraTrax ICE and Triton are all constant current anyway not pulsed.


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 26, 2007)

wptski said:


> Power Me Up:
> 
> Not sure where you came up with the fact that the original version terminated the dicharge at 1V no load but now it's .9V with a load?



From observation of the original version and comparing it to the improved version sitting next to it.

I've got some "crap" cells with high internal resistance that won't discharge in the new C9000 - they will only give a few mAh before it finishes. Take those same cells out and put them in the old C9000 and they'll discharge to close to their rated capacity. The cells themselves are pretty useless since they're not holding their voltage whilst under load.



> A cell will recover when the load is removed, so if it takes down to .9V loaded, what's the no load voltage? Normally over 1V for sure! If the no load voltage is 1V, it may have been taken down to .5, .4, .3 or 0V.


Quite possibly for cells with high internal resistance.

For good cells, it doesn't actually make that much difference - e.g. for Eneloops, I get quite similar results on both the old and the new C9000s.



> I can't see MAHA making such a mistake like you have stated!


Well, they did!



> I've tried taking a good ell down so the no load voltage is .9V using a Duratrax ICE, it can't be done, it recovers in less than a second and rises slowly


Aren't you actually meaning 1.00 Volts no load? 

What is the termination point for the Duratrax ICE?

I think that with the old C9000, most of the voltage difference is due to the internal resistance of the cell as well as the resistance between the cell and the contacts - the cell doesn't really have enough time for the voltage to otherwise recover much.

I suspect that the reason that they originally went with measuring the voltage under no load was to eliminate the effects of the contact resistance. 

Each method has its problems - the new version actually under reports the voltage that you would otherwise expect with currents below the maximum of 1 Amp - because it's actually measuring the voltage whilst the cell is undergoing a 1 Amp discharge. The 1 Amp discharge current is pulse width modulated to achieve the desired discharge rate. For cells with high internal resistance, it terminates the discharge early because the cells can't maintain 0.90 Volts under a 1 Amp load - even if they're quite capable of handling a 100 mA discharge.


----------



## wptski (Oct 26, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> From observation of the original version and comparing it to the improved version sitting next to it.
> 
> I've got some "crap" cells with high internal resistance that won't discharge in the new C9000 - they will only give a few mAh before it finishes. Take those same cells out and put them in the old C9000 and they'll discharge to close to their rated capacity. The cells themselves are pretty useless since they're not holding their voltage whilst under load.
> 
> ...


It's not cells with a high internal impedance either and furthermore, it's Ni-MH, Ni-CD or Li-Ion too, all cells voltage rise when the load is removed.

What's the voltage of cells after discharging on either of your chargers? Over 1V I'm sure! How can that be if you say one discharges to 1V no load? Quit watching the screen, I think that your seeing things! Connect a DMM to your original 1V no load charger, even though it's pulsed, you'll be able to see very very low voltage.

The ICE can be set to discharge to .1-1.1V. At the lowest settong of .1A going down to .1V, a Ni-MH will rise to over .9V when the load is removed.

Did I mean 1V no load? I think that I covered that but I'll say again, you can't really even discharge a cell to .9V no load because the cell voltage always rises to above .9V when the load is removed.


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 27, 2007)

wptski said:


> It's not cells with a high internal impedance either and furthermore, it's Ni-MH, Ni-CD or Li-Ion too, all cells voltage rise when the load is removed.
> 
> What's the voltage of cells after discharging on either of your chargers? Over 1V I'm sure! How can that be if you say one discharges to 1V no load?



It does take time for the voltage of a cell to fully recover after the load has been removed - it's not a totally instantaneous thing.

When you remove the load from a cell, the voltage will recover in 2 stages.

The first is an instantaneous jump because there is no longer a voltage drop due to the current flowing through the internal resistance of the cell (and any external contact resistance, wire resistance, etc)

The second is a more gradual rise as the ions redistribute themselves within the electrolyte. This can take a few seconds which you can prove to yourself by taking a discharged cell, put a CRO across it and then connect and disconnect a load to it.



> Quit watching the screen, I think that your seeing things!


So what is it that you think I'm seeing?



> Connect a DMM to your original 1V no load charger, even though it's pulsed, you'll be able to see very very low voltage.


Depending on the cell, yes, the voltage will be getting significantly below 1 Volt whilst it is under load.



> The ICE can be set to discharge to .1-1.1V. At the lowest settong of .1A going down to .1V, a Ni-MH will rise to over .9V when the load is removed.


Yes, but how long does it take for the voltage to recover?



> Did I mean 1V no load? I think that I covered that but I'll say again, you can't really even discharge a cell to .9V no load because the cell voltage always rises to above .9V when the load is removed.


I never said that any of the chargers discharge to 0.9 Volts no load. The first version discharges to 1.00 Volts no load. The second version discharges to 0.90 Volts under load.

If you don't want to take my word for it, you could just take the word of William Chueh in the other thread linked to by Anders. William Chueh is a respresentative of Maha/Powerex - the manufacturer of the Maha MH-C9000 Charger-Analyzer.

If you still don't want to believe us, can you please explain why a cell with high internal resistance that refuses to discharge on the new version of the C9000 will discharge fine on the old C9000?


----------



## bcwang (Oct 27, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> It'll be interesting to see if anyone else gets a new unit with that code on it.
> 
> Do you know how to reproduce the repeating digits bug? Could you have a go and see if the replacement unit still has that bug?



I'll try it out right now to see if it occurs.


----------



## wptski (Oct 27, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> It does take time for the voltage of a cell to fully recover after the load has been removed - it's not a totally instantaneous thing.
> 
> When you remove the load from a cell, the voltage will recover in 2 stages.
> 
> ...


I've never measured the exact recovery time of a Ni-MH cell but users of Li-Ion cells were saying that a light shut off, got dim, etc. and when they removed the cell(s) they measured this or that. I do remember a .6 second recovery time for Li-Ion, so by the time you remove the cell(s) grab your meter, well!

You didn't say .9V no load, I did. What I'm trying to point out is that I "tried" to discharge to .9V no load and it can't be done because a healty cell will always recover to over .9V as soon as the load is removed.

I've talked to William Chueh going back ten years about my first MAHA C210 charger. Either he is mistaken or the pulse rate is faster than the no load recovery time, if not, it could damage the cell.

I ask one more time. What does a cell's voltage show on your original unit right after a discharge cycle finishes??

This is also a also a major change in the operation that I never heard about. Of course I don't spend that much time here anymore too!

I can't explain differences in operation with different units with high impedance cells. They are crap cells, recycle them!

Are you actually seeing a .9V discharge value on one and 1V on the other while watching or are you going by what William Chueh said?

EDIT: Discharging a single cell at 500ma showed .9V and in the cycle period of the display show it recovered to 1.09V the next time.


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 27, 2007)

wptski said:


> I've never measured the exact recovery time of a Ni-MH cell but users of Li-Ion cells were saying that a light shut off, got dim, etc. and when they removed the cell(s) they measured this or that. I do remember a .6 second recovery time for Li-Ion, so by the time you remove the cell(s) grab your meter, well!



It takes a lot less time for the C9000 to remove the load and measure the voltage than it does to remove a cell from a flashlight!



> You didn't say .9V no load, I did. What I'm trying to point out is that I "tried" to discharge to .9V no load and it can't be done because a healty cell will always recover to over .9V as soon as the load is removed.


Right... But since I never said 0.90 Volts under load, I fail to see the relevance!



> I've talked to William Chueh going back ten years about my first MAHA C210 charger. Either he is mistaken or the pulse rate is faster than the no load recovery time, if not, it could damage the cell.


I'd say that the time between removing the load and measuring the voltage is significantly less than the recovery time for the cell.



> I ask one more time. What does a cell's voltage show on your original unit right after a discharge cycle finishes??


Sorry - I don't recall you asking that.

On both units, the voltage does rise after the discharge has completed. I can't recall exact numbers at the moment and my old C9000 is currently doing a break in cycle at the moment. I can do a test later today and report back actual numbers if you like?



> This is also a also a major change in the operation that I never heard about. Of course I don't spend that much time here anymore too!


I don't think this is something that will make much difference to most people, so not too many people would have noticed...



> I can't explain differences in operation with different units with high impedance cells. They are crap cells, recycle them!


Actually, some of them are 2500 Energizers - I'm waiting for them to come out with LSD cells, so that I might be able to get them instead when I return them.



> Are you actually seeing a .9V discharge value on one and 1V on the other while watching or are you going by what William Chueh said?


Yes - I'm seeing the discharges terminate at 1.00 Volts on the old C9000 and 0.90 Volts on the new C9000.


----------



## TorchBoy (Oct 27, 2007)

Bill, what Power Me Up is explaining is accurate. That *is* the way the old and new versions work.

And since you've explained it so well, Power Me Up, I don't think I need to add anything here at all. :thumbsup:


----------



## wptski (Oct 28, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> It takes a lot less time for the C9000 to remove the load and measure the voltage than it does to remove a cell from a flashlight!
> 
> Right... But since I never said 0.90 Volts under load, I fail to see the relevance!
> 
> ...


Wether it's .9V or 1V, it doesn't matter, a cell recovers and that's what makes it relevant. I could have been using 1V and still have the same results.

Energizer 2500 are crap cells, I have four that won't hold a charge also!

If somebody stated 1V no load, it should really mean that, not 1V on the OFF cycle. If the cell hasn't had a chance to recover then it isn't a no load condition fully!


----------



## Power Me Up (Oct 28, 2007)

wptski said:


> If somebody stated 1V no load, it should really mean that, not 1V on the OFF cycle. If the cell hasn't had a chance to recover then it isn't a no load condition fully!



William Chueh had worded things a bit differently to me:



willchueh said:


> The MH-C9000 uses 1.00V voltage to terminate discharge, but it is the OFFLINE voltage, which is measured with the current turned off. CBA uses the ONLINE voltage which is measured with the current still on.



Were his words also confusing?

To me "no load" just says that the load isn't connected - it doesn't say how long the load is actually disconnected for...

Anyway... I think everyone is now clear on this topic?


----------



## wptski (Oct 28, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> William Chueh had worded things a bit differently to me:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The topic isn't clear but still fuzzy as many questions about the C9000!

His statement is too brief If the pulse rate on discharge is the same as on charging it was just under 2 seconds, so it measured as the cell's voltage was still rising and probably not very accurate. That's probably why it was charged to the standard loaded voltage.

Unless one can figure out on their own, how it works, MAHA isn't going to tell you exactly how it works! Many questions were posted here since the C9000 was released in 12/05 but MAHA didn't answer the ones that were never figured out. Just lots of "IMHO" now!


----------



## Artie Choke (Oct 28, 2007)

I just bought one direct from Maha and it has the 0G0IA code. Right now I'm running the refresh/analyze mode on some 2300 mah Energizers. Hopefully they'll hold a charge for longer than a week - doh! I had some really old PowerEx batteries from Maha and two of them showed HIGH, so I'm tossing those.

It's independent bays really make it nice if you want to charge different brand or capacity batteries at the same time.


----------



## bcwang (Oct 30, 2007)

Ok, I tested 0G0IA for the repeating digit bug but I don't see it. I'm not sure if I did it right since I've never seen it, but what I did was

1. Insert 4 cells, put them all into default ch/disch and 3 cycles
2. go to slot 1, push down arrow until cycle 1, when it shows capacity it said something like 1865mah, so with the bug would it have shown 1818?
3. I also looked at every cycle of every slot and nothing looked like the repeating digit bug.

One strange thing I noticed is after running this charger through some tenergy 2500 and an energizer 2500 I have, the capacity has been showing 16xx to 18xx mah. I don't remember the capacities of these cells being so low when tested in the past. I'm going to have to try out some fresh batteries to see if it's the charger or if those batteries really already went bad even with so little usage. I'll probably also test the same batteries in my bc900 to see if it gives similar readings now.


----------



## snakebite (Oct 31, 2007)

got both of mine replaced a while back due to missed termination.
got 0g0d01
but now one has a bad slot button and the other one is now developing a flaky slot button.
anyone else?


----------



## BrianChan (Nov 2, 2007)

Hi Power Me Up,

I usually charge all my cells at 2A with my OGOE02, am I correct to say that the old version gives a more complete charge at this rate compared to the improved version, which requires a 2 hour top-off charge before going into trickle charge?

From what I've read the issue with old versions was missed termination at low charge rates, there were no termination issues with a 2A charge rate. With my preference to charge at 2A this would not be an issue to me at all. If this is true I guess I would be happy to exchange my new 0G0E02 version for an old one with someone here.


----------



## Power Me Up (Nov 2, 2007)

BrianChan said:


> Hi Power Me Up,
> 
> I usually charge all my cells at 2A with my OGOE02, am I correct to say that the old version gives a more complete charge at this rate compared to the improved version, which requires a 2 hour top-off charge before going into trickle charge?
> 
> From what I've read the issue with old versions was missed termination at low charge rates, there were no termination issues with a 2A charge rate. With my preference to charge at 2A this would not be an issue to me at all. If this is true I guess I would be happy to exchange my new 0G0E02 version for an old one with someone here.



After the 2 hour top-off charge, your cells should be pretty close to their full capacity.

If you're charging at 2A because you're in a hurry and you want to pull them as soon as the charger says "Done" then yes, the original version will give you a more complete charge.


----------



## servaas (Nov 4, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> ...the original version will give you a more complete charge.



Has someone tested this, or is it because the 0Fxxxx models report a higher capacity than the 0Gxxxx models on the same batteries?


----------



## Power Me Up (Nov 4, 2007)

servaas said:


> Has someone tested this, or is it because the 0Fxxxx models report a higher capacity than the 0Gxxxx models on the same batteries?



You're misquoting me by leaving out the majority of that sentence...

I've got both 0F and 0G units, so I'll do some testing to compare both charging and discharging on both types and report back.


----------



## SilverFox (Nov 4, 2007)

Hello Servaas,

Welcome to CPF.

Here are some test results to review...

Tom


----------



## servaas (Nov 4, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> You're misquoting me by leaving out the majority of that sentence...


Sorry Power Me Up, not trying to twist your words, just trying to focus in on the difference between the charge completeness of the 2 versions.


> I've got both 0F and 0G units, so I'll do some testing to compare both charging and discharging on both types and report back.


Cool.


----------



## servaas (Nov 4, 2007)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Servaas,
> 
> Welcome to CPF.


Thanks!


> Here are some test results to review...
> 
> Tom


Interesting. So it would seem the newer OG version is terminating the charge slightly earlier than the OF version?

Jeff


----------



## Power Me Up (Nov 5, 2007)

servaas said:


> Sorry Power Me Up, not trying to twist your words, just trying to focus in on the difference between the charge completeness of the 2 versions.



No worries.


----------



## mpcrice (Nov 8, 2007)

Hi,
I have been reading about the Maha MH C9000 for a month or so as well as lurking around in these forums. For work, I would like to get an advanced charger and the C9000 seems to fit the bill. However, I have a few questions.

First, after reading many pages on the C9000, I have seen a few references to the fact that it charges AA’s to only about 95% of capacity when the light turns on. However, the older Maha C204W is said to charge to 98%. Is there a way to program a cycle to have the C9000 emulate the performance of the C204W to get higher capacity?

Second, I would like to get a charger for my mother. I can almost guarantee that she will forget to remove the batteries until she needs to use them. Is there a way to program it to charge the batteries and then keep a very low, safe current on them or have it cycle the power on and off (similar to the NEX_cell_ 50SC sleep/wake mode) as to not damage the batteries?

When you program a custom setting, does the C9000 remember it each time you put in a new battery or do you have to reprogram it?

Thanks
John


----------



## SilverFox (Nov 8, 2007)

Hello John,

Welcome to CPF.

If you leave the cell on the charger after the "Done" is displayed, it tops off the charge and you end up with fully charged batteries. This top off charge runs for 2 hours.

The trickle charge on the C-9000 is quite low. I don't recommend leaving cells in a charger, but if you are going to do this, the C-9000 would be a good charger to do it with.

The C-9000 has some default settings. If you put a cell in to charge, the default is to charge at 1000 mA. In refresh mode, the default charge rate is 1000 mA and the discharge rate is 500 mA. When you change these settings, the change only applies until you remove the cell. When you stick a new cell in, the charger reverts back to the default settings.

Tom


----------



## TorchBoy (Nov 8, 2007)

mpcrice said:


> Second, I would like to get a charger for my mother.


The MH-C9000 might be quite good for that since it would reject non-rechargeable cells inadvertently plugged into it, but I'm sure there are less expensive chargers that wouldn't have all the unnecessary(?) analysing functions.

:welcome:


----------



## Bones (Nov 8, 2007)

mpcrice said:


> Second, I would like to get a charger for my mother. I can almost guarantee that she will forget to remove the batteries until she needs to use them. Is there a way to program it to charge the batteries and then keep a very low, safe current on them or have it cycle the power on and off (similar to the NEX_cell_ 50SC sleep/wake mode) as to not damage the batteries?



I have been on a similar quest John, and I'm currently leaning towards the MahaEnergy MH-C401FS rather than their MH-C9000.

It's been around for a while, but with only one setting (a charge rate switch), I have yet to find an alternative as simple to use that also addresses my basic concerns somewhat competently.

The first is whether it will be truly safe to leave the cells inserted for extended periods, which will invariably happen, and the second is the consequences of this practice on the cells.

The third is the need to periodically deep condition NiMH cells to prevent voltage depression and keep the cells as healthy as possible.

Towards these concerns, I found the following excerpts from a quite complimentary review of the charger by Steve's DigiCams helpful:



> The C401FS automatically analyzes each cell before it begins charging. Normally all of the LED indicators turn red until the charge cycle is completed. When finished, the LEDs turn green to indicate that the charger is now in trickle mode. This trickle mode uses a safe, 50mA current and most NiMH batteries can accept this level indefinitely. I always have a set sitting in my charger so I know they are fully charged.





> The C401FS uses a unique FLEX negative pulse charging algorithm which allows the battery to be more completely charged. In addition to charging batteries more efficiently, the FLEX pulse method also eliminates the old fashioned battery conditioning mode. Select either the fast 100 minute charge mode or the slower and cooler 5 hour mode which greatly enhances the battery life.



There is also a forth concern that I never recognized until I started using the MH-C9000; the cells can be a real bear to insert and remove, especially without damaging the cells or the charger. As time passes, this will become an increasing challege for those beloved hands.

It's available from Thomas Distributing in both black and white for just under 40 dollars. This seems expensive to me considering the sophisticated alternatives available for an equivalent amount, but their sophistication is also what makes them unsuitable in this instance.


----------



## GaryF (Nov 9, 2007)

Bones said:


> I have been on a similar quest John, and I'm currently leaning towards the MahaEnergy MH-C401FS rather than their MH-C9000.
> 
> It's been around for a while, but with only one setting (a charge rate switch), I have yet to find an alternative as simple to use that also addresses my basic concerns somewhat competently.



+1

I love the information I get from the C9000 and the extra control it gives me, but the C401FS does a good job of just charging batteries. It does heat the cells up a little more than the C9000, but that seems like an ok trade off. Red light = charging, green light = done. I doubt my mother would be able to easily read the display on the C9000.


----------



## Bones (Nov 9, 2007)

GaryF said:


> I love the information I get from the C9000 and the extra control it gives me, but the C401FS does a good job of just charging batteries. It does heat the cells up a little more than the C9000, but that seems like an ok trade off. Red light = charging, green light = done. I doubt my mother would be able to easily read the display on the C9000.



Good to hear from someone who has the charger GaryF.

Do you find the higher heat manifests itself with both the fast and slow(er) charge rates?

MahaEnergy has actually labelled the MH-C401FS a 'cool' charger when set to the latter.

I'm thinking of this charger (set to slow) and sufficient Eneloops to have a few set aside, so there should be no real need for the fast charge rate.


----------



## GaryF (Nov 9, 2007)

Bones said:


> Do you find the higher heat manifests itself with both the fast and slow(er) charge rates?



The batteries stay cool at the slow rate, and the slow rate was pretty much all I used until about a year ago without any problems - maybe one or two missed terminations out of hundreds of charge cycles. Once I started reading the battery and charger threads here, I began experimenting with the higher rate. I figure the higher temps have a very minor impact on battery life, but not enough to worry about in typical usage. It's not like it is really cooking them like some chargers have been known to do. 

I will put this plug in for the C9000. The C9000 at 2000mA keeps the batteries cooler than the C401FS on high (1000mA), and at 1000mA the C9000 is as cool as the C401FS on low. Both are cooler even at their highest rates than another brand charger that I have that charges at a fixed 700mA rate.

I still like the C401FS for it's simplicity for a non technical user.


----------



## Lite_me (Nov 9, 2007)

I purchased a C401FS a short time back. I have, and have been using a La Crosse BC-900 for about a year and a half. Once I learned the ins and outs of battery charging and battery care from using the BC-900, (and all the excellent support here), I wanted something simple I could just plop the batteries in and forget it. I felt the C401FS (except for maybe the price) fit the bill. I often charge single cells so I needed this type. It has a middle of the road charging rate for speed and gentleness. I use the fast rate (1000 mA for AA & 500mA for AAA) most of the time and it seems perfect for me. The only time the cells seem to noticeably heat up (AA's) is when I'm charging 4 of em at a time. And even then, it's not that bad. They don't,"over heat". I _will_ direct some air over them tho, if it's handy. 

All in all though, I like the charger very much. A very simple, relatively fast charger that just does the job. I have a variety of brands and most come off the charger at around 1.44v-1.48v. (if that means anything )


----------



## Hollow Man (Nov 16, 2007)

It's been good to read these comments, because I bought the C401FS last year and had been considering upgrading to the C9000 or La Crosse BC-900.

At the time I bought it, I had researched and learned enough about batteries, but didn't feel confident enough to use a fancier charger. I did learn enough to realize that on "slow", it was doing my 2700 mAh cells at just over .1C, which is far below the .4 to 1C people recommend. I wrote to them about it, and Eric Chang wrote me back, assuring me I'd be fine (even though their own instructions for the C9000 suggest not using a charge rate under .33C!), and it would just take a while at ~9 hours.

To his credit, I've never experienced a problem with it missing a termination. I use primarily AA PowerEx 2700 mAh, AA Eneloops, and AAA PowerEx 1000 mAh. I almost always use the slow charge though, because the fast charge really does heat them up.

So maybe instead of buying the C9000 or BC-900, I'll experiment with the "fast" setting on the 401FS, perhaps with a fan over the batteries.

It seems sort of a waste of money considering what you get with the La Crosse (which is the same price), but honestly, the darn thing has worked great - much better than the dumb timer charger I got with my first set of Energerizer AAs.

-HM


----------



## Tubor (Nov 16, 2007)

Anyone had any problems with the Hahnel 1.25v AAA NiMh? Seemed to terminate all over the place (3 rated at 900mAh, terminated at 1000mAh, terminated at 1200mAh, 1450mAh when I terminated it; charging current 200mA)? I then discharged them and they all had between 700-850mAh in them.


----------



## Bones (Nov 21, 2007)

bcwang said:


> Ok, I tested 0G0IA for the repeating digit bug but I don't see it. I'm not sure if I did it right since I've never seen it, but what I did was
> 
> 1. Insert 4 cells, put them all into default ch/disch and 3 cycles
> 2. Go to slot 1, push down arrow until cycle 1, when it shows capacity it said something like 1865mah, so with the bug would it have shown 1818?
> 3. I also looked at every cycle of every slot and nothing looked like the repeating digit bug.



Providing you scrolled through the results after the third cycle was completed without seeing the repeating digits, then it appears the bug has finally been fixed in your release bcwang.

I wonder why it took so long?


----------



## jkraus (Dec 8, 2007)

Power Me Up said:


> It'll be interesting to see if anyone else gets a new unit with that code on it.
> 
> Do you know how to reproduce the repeating digits bug? Could you have a go and see if the replacement unit still has that bug?



Got an 0G01A (0G0IA) and test run it against the 0G0D01. First observation during break in mode: after ca. 12 h of charging at 0.1C, the indicated voltage is at 1.5/1.51 V at the 0G01A, whereas it is at 1.45V at the 0G0D01. Significance?


----------



## Dantor (Dec 22, 2007)

Well I finally pulled the plug and just ordered a C9000  and my first eneloops are coming, thank you all for your tips and advice and findings, it's been a great help and I feel confident I'm getting a good charger and batteries. I'm also bumping this for the newbies. Happy holidays all...


----------



## Thujone (Jan 2, 2008)

Alright... Problems.

I have had my c9000 for a year now. Last night I had two eneloops charging and went to add a 3rd. Right when I plugged it in the screen went dark. Powered off. If I unplug it and plug it back in the screen comes to life and it does its boot process at the end of which it immediately shuts back off. It behaves the same with and without cells in it and on both the wall wart and 12v auto adapter.


----------



## Thujone (Jan 2, 2008)

Brief update and kudos to Maha. 

After a brief exchange with Maha through email they requested my address so that they could fire a new unit out to me. I am quit surprised, no quibble over the unit being slightly over a year old, just an offer to replace.


----------



## Dantor (Jan 2, 2008)

they are a class act, I get mine today or tomorrow!
glad it was taken care of 4 U.


----------



## Anders (Jan 2, 2008)

Hello Thujone.

Yes they have greate service.

I bought my first unit from thomas-distributing.com, when it became faulty, I contacted MAHA here in Sweden, they replaced it immediatly.

It is good that they have three years warranty.

Anders


----------



## cdosrun (Jan 2, 2008)

Well,

on the reports I have read here I just popped down to a local shop that had stock of these chargers (0G0D01) and I have four cells sitting in it right now. I am certainly impressed with appearance, I am just waiting on the performance. I have some Eneloops to try in due course and I bought a pack of four of the MAHA LSD cells with the charger to try out.

My only complaint so far is the noise, does everybody's make the annoying pulsed whistle (coinciding with the charging pulses?)? I have to say, it is beginning to annoy me, perhaps I need to find somewhere else to put it.

Andrew


----------



## Burgess (Jan 2, 2008)

I have the same Firmware version as you,

and i've NEVER been able to detect ANY audible noise from mine.


But, i admit, i *do* have tinnitus (ringing in my ears).


Perhaps i'm simply unable to hear it ? ? ?

:candle:
_


----------



## Power Me Up (Jan 3, 2008)

cdosrun said:


> My only complaint so far is the noise, does everybody's make the annoying pulsed whistle (coinciding with the charging pulses?)? I have to say, it is beginning to annoy me, perhaps I need to find somewhere else to put it.



I believe that they all make that noise. I've got 3 of them and they all do it...

I think it's just a matter of whether the user can actually hear that particular frequency...


----------



## lebox97 (Jan 3, 2008)

yah mine does it too - kinda annoying in the middle of the night (when all else is quiet)... some modes seem to be a little louder than others? Break-in is worst - or maybe just because I have to listen to it for almost 2 days


----------



## edc3 (Jan 3, 2008)

Mine makes the noise. As far as I know, it's normal. I must be sensitive to that frequency because I'm the only one in the house that really notices it. Even the cats don't seem to mind.


----------



## cdosrun (Jan 3, 2008)

I thought it was perhaps normal, I just find it a little annoying, I've always had pretty good hearing though; a friend of mine has some 'ultrasonic' cat repellers and they annoy the hell out of me when I walk up the driveway, and I have heard some bats chirping before when they were flying towards me. One advantage is that you can hear when it has finished the top-off and moved to the trickle charge.

I thought it would show how inadequate a charger my old Battery Manager Ultra is but I tried some AAA Eneloops that I have had lying around for a few months and they all terminated within a few minutes.

So far, so good.....

Thank you,

Andrew


----------



## Yps (Jan 12, 2008)

Which shops sells this charger? Best price with shipping to Euorpe ?

/Magnus


----------



## Anders (Jan 13, 2008)

Hello Magnus.

I suppose you are from Sweden, in that case
http://www.chargeit.se/shop/


Anders


----------



## Yps (Jan 13, 2008)

Thanks, prices looks good.

/Magnus


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 15, 2008)

SilverFox said:


> Hello Ian,
> 
> Let me see if I can find an answer to that... I just got a new unit and will have to run some tests to see if it repeats digits on slot 1 during cycling.
> 
> Tom


Tom, did you ever find an answer to that? (That the repeating digit capacity reporting problem has been fixed.)


----------



## Black Rose (Mar 15, 2008)

cdosrun said:


> My only complaint so far is the noise, does everybody's make the annoying pulsed whistle (coinciding with the charging pulses?)? I have to say, it is beginning to annoy me, perhaps I need to find somewhere else to put it.


I got one yesterday (0G0KA_) _and was expecting it to be noisy based on the reports I've read here. 

I just loaded in four 2000 mAh AA cells and it only made 2 pulse noises after I added the fourth cell. 

It's only been running for half an hour on a Refresh Analyze cycle (0.5C charge and 1.0C discharge), but it hasn't made any more noise since.


----------



## Burgess (Mar 15, 2008)

I've never heard *anything* outta' mine.


Although, i confess, (at age 54) my hearing isn't the greatest.


_


----------



## Yoda4561 (Mar 16, 2008)

The noise is very high in frequency and honestly not that loud, if the room is very very quiet however it's quite annoying. If I turn on a fan or watch tv it's inaudible over the noise.


----------



## SilverFox (Mar 16, 2008)

Hello Ian,

The repeating digit during cycling has been fixed.

Tom


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 16, 2008)

So there _is_ a third firmware version.


----------



## Mr Happy (Mar 16, 2008)

William Chueh did post previously that there were only two firmware versions, but I will correct myself if that information is now out of date. Do we know from which version the fix was introduced?


----------



## SilverFox (Mar 16, 2008)

My fixed unit is an OG one.

Tom


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 17, 2008)

My non-fixed unit is an OG one. That implies that the OG isn't the firmware version.


----------



## Handlobraesing (Mar 20, 2008)

Mine's a 0G0B01..


----------



## Raymond (Mar 22, 2008)

I'm probably the 100th person to ask this, but I've searched and didn't find an usuable answer: Which shop ships this charger internationally with reasonable shipping charges? (thomasdistributing ships with fedex, which is expensive because of both shipping charges and the way fedex handles the payment of importcharges)


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 22, 2008)

I got mine from TD, and yes, the shipping was quite a bit (that means "abit" for those who type "alot" BTW  ) but I added some batteries to the order without much increasing the shipping, and with a few battery cases they threw in it worked out OK. Not brilliant, but OK.


----------



## Handlobraesing (Mar 22, 2008)

I'm expecting Mr. Chueh to address the questions. I have seen his profile and he has been active, but no recent post from him. 

I was able to duplicate the bug, where a cell with measured capacity in slot 1 and only slot 1 would be reported in cycle history as xyxy mAh instead of wxyz mAh as it should be. The last two digits are repitition of the first two digits.


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 22, 2008)

I'm not aware that anyone has ever heard anything from Maha about the repeating digits problem.


----------



## Raymond (Mar 23, 2008)

Well, I ordered one.
It's such a nice charger, but there are just too few stores that sell it. I was tempted to buy the angeleyes charger on kaidomain.com, which seemed like a decent product too. But I figured that if I was to spend too much on a charger, I might just as well spend the extra $30 on the one which seems to be the best regarded


----------



## Ziemas (Mar 24, 2008)

Raymond said:


> I'm probably the 100th person to ask this, but I've searched and didn't find an usuable answer: Which shop ships this charger internationally with reasonable shipping charges? (thomasdistributing ships with fedex, which is expensive because of both shipping charges and the way fedex handles the payment of importcharges)



There are several European dealers of Maha products; you'll most likely be better off using one of them or perhaps directly from Maha if they can ship for a decent price. Maha also stocks European plugs in their US warehouse. After shipping, customs, and VAT it's really a wash. 

http://www.mahaenergy.com/store/buy.asp


----------



## brightnorm (Mar 24, 2008)

I had two Eneloops that I refresh/analysed on the 9000 to 1890mah and 1930mah. I used them in a Canon A570IS until "low battery" flashed, then recharged them at the default rate. When the 9000 showed "done" they only were at approx 1000mah. I then tested them on my ZTS and they read in the top segment. 

Any explanation for this, and should I regard them as fully charged despite the low mah? 

Brightnorm,


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 24, 2008)

brightnorm said:


> When the 9000 showed "done" they only were at approx 1000mah.


How do you know? Did you do another discharge to find out? Or is 1000 mAh what the charger put into them? If that's the case the camera should have kept going for ages as it had only half used them when you took them out. It sounds like your Canon is a bit fussy for voltage.



brightnorm said:


> I then tested them on my ZTS and they read in the top segment.


Because they were fully charged.


----------



## brightnorm (Mar 25, 2008)

I didn't realize that you have to discharge them to get the actual mah. When I recharge them in the future should I accept "done" regardless of Mah and feel confident that they are in fact fully recharged? 

BN


----------



## TorchBoy (Mar 25, 2008)

When the MH-C9000 shows DONE the cell is charged. It's accurate. There _is_ also a two hour low current top-off charge but in most uses you wouldn't notice the extra runtime it would give you, and you can take them off straight away if you need to use the cells or the charger.


----------



## brightnorm (Mar 25, 2008)

OK, thanks.

BN


----------



## alank2 (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi,

I got a C9000 from TD last week, it is 0G0KA.

My only complaint is I wish I had two of them since the breakin takes so long!!

Thanks,

Alan


----------



## alank2 (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi,

By the way, how tolerant of a power glitch is the C9000 ? For example, let's say I was in the middle of a 40+ hour break in and power goes out for 5 seconds. Does it resume where it left off?

Thanks,

Alan


----------



## Black Rose (Jul 10, 2008)

Unfortunately, it will go into a normal charge cycle from a 5 second power outage.

It's happened to me a couple of times, but in my case I was only 5 hours into a break-in cycle, so it wasn't too bad.


----------



## alank2 (Jul 10, 2008)

Hi,

I guess I should plug it into my UPS then, that should save it!

Thanks,

Alan


----------



## hank (Dec 5, 2008)

Got mine today (late adopter)
from Zbattery
It's identified as "0H0DA" 
Now to read two long threads and the manual ...


----------



## hank (Dec 5, 2008)

So, ah, now that I've read Parts I and II of this thread, and some other threads, and the manual, and I'm looking at the summary table, "recommended mode for typical battery conditions."

It looks simple. Anyone have any very specific info that ought to be added to it?

Is it useful to label each battery and keep track individually and keep them in sets?
I assume so, but am not sure what exactly I'd want to record to keep track of, yet.
Or will I learn enough about each battery each time it's used not to worry about history?

I have my last two notorious Energizer 2500s that will still hold a charge for about 48 hours -- is it worth following the "Batteries showing poor performance" mode (Refresh & Analyze 1 to 3 times) with those?


----------



## Mr Happy (Dec 5, 2008)

This is kind of theoretical, depending on how keen you want to be about the whole thing. But...


Label each battery uniquely on purchase so you can identify it
Record each battery in a notebook with its purchase date and manufacturing date (if known)
When you buy new batteries, put them through a break-in cycle and in the notebook record the capacity for each cell
When you have a number of batteries of the same type and approximate manufacturing date, group them into sets according to similar capacities as recorded in 3
Every six months or so, repeat the break-in cycle on each battery and compare the capacity with the originally recorded capacity
When a cell's capacity has decreased to 80% of its original value, consider it recycle material
As far as rescuing the Energizer 2500s, they are probably a lost cause. Once they have developed rapid discharge syndrome there is nothing that can be done to fix them.


----------



## Yoda4561 (Dec 6, 2008)

For cells I tend to use in sets, I like to mark them with a colored sharpie to make sure they stay together.


----------



## hank (Dec 6, 2008)

Good advice (I've kept sets marked together all along, now I'll find out if they're remotely similar after many uses).

Another question -- the default "Refresh/Analyze" charge and discharge rate (1000/500) always come up the same so far, for several different capacity AA and AAA cells. I don't see anything about this, is there any reason to fiddle with those?

I have some well used AAAs I put through Refresh/Analyze in the last 24 hours that came out around 450mah (generic Chinese) and some around 950 (Maha brand) when done.
Would there have been any reason to test and fiddle with the settings before putting them through this process?

Another -- one place the docs say NiMH and NiCD; another place refers only to NiMH.

I still have a few NiCD cells I use where their slow self discharge has been useful, from the pre-Eneloop days. Are they handled just the same, and are the banks independent for type of chemistry?


----------



## Mr Happy (Dec 6, 2008)

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it can charge NiCd as well as NiMH. You can usually charge NiCd in NiMH chargers, but not the other way around.

1000 mA/500 mA is fine for charge/discharge of AA cells, but for AAA cells it would be a good idea to halve those to 500 mA charge, 300 mA discharge. 1000 mA is a little high for charging AAA cells.


----------



## Yoda4561 (Dec 7, 2008)

It does nicad just fine, though you might want to turn down the charge speed a bit manually, as it defaults to 1000ma on all AA/AAA? cells. That's a little less than 2c on an average AA nicad, so it should be fine even if you don't.


----------



## hank (Dec 7, 2008)

I've only tried NiMH cells (AA and AAA size) so far, and it's always come up with the same settings. 

Remember I'm brand new to this, and I've only used the "Refresh/Analyze" option on a dozen cells so far, half AA and half AAA, all NiMH, -- ranging from 2300 mAh AAs to 400 mAh AAAs.

I was guessing that 'Refresh/Analyze' detected the capacity and works with it, but if it doesn't detect the size, maybe not.

I looked for more info about the range of choices available and when to change the defaults -- is that summed up anywhere else? Nothing much in the one sheet instructions.

I haven't put a NiCD into it yet so don't know if it detects the difference and does anything different automatically or not.

A cell in the shorter AAA slot vs. the longer AA slot doesn't change the default.
I'm a bit surprised the device also doesn't prompt to be told which it's dealing with, as some other chargers do,


----------



## Yoda4561 (Dec 7, 2008)

They must have figured that a 1000ma default was safe enough for NIMH AAA's, I would have preferred 400 for the aaa slots though. I haven't taken a close look in a while but I'm guessing there's only one contact pair per slot, instead of seperate circuits for AAA and AA slots.


----------



## hank (Dec 7, 2008)

> one contact pair per slot?

Only someone who's opened up the charger case can answer this -- from the outside, there appear to be different contacts for the AAA and AAA cells, not a continuous piece of metal. But behind the plastic, it might be just one piece.


----------



## hank (Dec 7, 2008)

(On the settings -- I should note that in the Mode instructions under "Charge" (but not under "Refresh-Analyze") it says refer to a "General Battery Education" paragraph that says "charge" should be between 0.3 x the capacity and 1.0 x capacity. I'd guess that same advice actually applies to the "Refresh-Analyze" mode as well.)

For the cheap Chinese NiMH AAAs, they were labeled as 650 mAh -- the default 1000 setting was too high, in hindsight -- and they tested out at about 400-450 mAh so the default setting was way too high. Oh, well, my mistake.

----
OK, now into my first "Break-in" (four unused AA Eneloops). That'll take a few days.


----------



## hank (Dec 15, 2008)

OK, this is interesting. Six days later .....

I had an 8-pack of AA Eneloops.

I'd used four of them variously (one in a 1xAA light, random pairs in 2xAA lights) and not used the other four at all.

I ran the "Break-In" on the four never- used cells, and all four came out very close; they're rated 2000 mAh but the charger said they were a bit above 2200 mAh when breakin finished.

I then ran the "Break-In" on the four variously used cells -- three came out in the low 1900s and one in the mid-1800s. I ran it again, no change. 

Does "Break-in" make a longterm improvement in cells when done first thing? Or will this higher number on those fade out once I start using the cells?

I have several more 8-packs of AA Eneloops I'd tossed in the emergency bin. I'm guessing it makes sense to run all of them through break-in right away, and mark them in sets?

--------

I"m still relying for daily use on older NiMH cells, figuring the Eneloops' real advantage is to have them ready when the next big earthquake happens.


----------



## Mr Happy (Dec 15, 2008)

hank said:


> OK, this is interesting.


Yes, this is interesting. You are possibly the first to report definite evidence that a break-in charge is beneficial prior to first use of Eneloops.

The theory is that a break-in or forming charge is like a tune-up for cells. It redistributes the electrolyte and "activates" the chemistry. As a result, the cell will suffer less wear in subsequent charging and will perform better overall. The theory suggests that if you charge cells at a normal rate without breaking them in first, then parts of the cell can form localized "hot spots" and may be degraded causing an overall loss of capacity.

There has been some debate whether this forming charge is as necessary with LSD cells like Eneloops as it is with older cell designs. But based on this theory and your observations you should run a break-in charge on your remaining Eneloops before using them, but not necessarily right away unless you plan to use them right away. Once a break-in charge has been completed, the cells start back on a slow path to their previous un-broken-in state.


----------



## Black Rose (Dec 15, 2008)

That is interesting.

I ran break-ins on all of my Eneloops and only 4 of the 44 AA cells I have exceeded 2000 mAh. 

hank, when were your cells made?


----------



## Burgess (Dec 15, 2008)

Very interesting, indeed !


_


----------



## hank (Dec 17, 2008)

I'll look for the date and come back and post it. I bought them early in 2008 sometime, I _think_. (Where do I look to find the date info?)

NOTE, I am new to this charger -- so don't rely on any number I report as being what I think it is! 

Any time I'm the first person to report anything, I'd suspect I'm making a mistake --- tell me an exact cookbook procedure to follow to check, and I'll tell you the result.

I do have another dozen unused AA Eneloops and I'll keep careful track.


----------



## Black Rose (Dec 17, 2008)

The date code will be on the opposite side of the battery to the Eneloop logo. It's along the joint of the wrapper.

You'll need to position the battery on an angle so that the numbers and letters will be visible.

Here is a thread that indicates how to decipher the date code.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Jan 12, 2009)

I know this has been discussed somewhere, but a search for D cell adapters here doesn't seem to bring anything up. I am looking for discussion of the various methods people use to adapt the C9000 to test D cells. Thanks.


----------



## TakeTheActive (Jan 13, 2009)

*Re: Adapt the C9000 to Test D Cells...*



Turbo DV8 said:


> ...I am looking for discussion of the various methods people use to adapt the C9000 to test D cells. Thanks.


I have this one in my Subscriptions: *Testing C/D cells in Maha C9000*


----------



## davegLED (Jan 20, 2009)

TorchBoy said:


> When the MH-C9000 shows DONE the cell is charged. It's accurate. There _is_ also a two hour low current top-off charge but in most uses you wouldn't notice the extra runtime it would give you, and you can take them off straight away if you need to use the cells or the charger.



Is this top up charge given before or after the charger states 'DONE'? I couldn't see this in the manual anywhere.

Cheers,
Dave


----------



## Codeman (Jan 20, 2009)

After.


----------



## Mr Happy (Jan 20, 2009)

davegLED said:


> Is this top up charge given before or after the charger states 'DONE'? I couldn't see this in the manual anywhere.


It is after. Once the main charge process finishes and DONE appears, the charger then applies a further 100 mA topping off charge for another two hours before dropping down to a low trickle charge for charge maintenance. The topping off process can be seen by watching the voltage on the display, which will often continue to creep up by 0.02 V or so after DONE is shown.

This is written down somewhere, but I forget exactly where.


----------



## davegLED (Jan 20, 2009)

Thanks for the replies guys. Couldn't resist getting the charger as I had some store vouchers from Christmas and found the store carried the charger :twothumbs

I have a set of Eneloops on at the moment and will report back what capacity I get from them, I presume it switches to the discharge mAH after a 'Break In' cycle as I was asleep when it finished discharging and started charging.


----------



## davegLED (Jan 21, 2009)

Well the break in gave me capacities given below for a four pack of Eneloops

1972mAh
1975mAh
1958mAh
1976mAh

Perhaps this will increase a little after a few cycles? I have another set I am going to use without breaking in with the MH-C9000 and see if I get a difference when I test both sets after about 10 cycles.

They pair up well apart from the one at 1958mAh  I'm sure an extra 20mAh won't mean much though.

I have taken Happy's suggestion and used a CD marker pen to label the cells 1A 1B etc so I can monitor their capacities and number of charge cycles. As a quick question at what point can I recharge the cells from to get a good deltaV? Can they be charged from 2/3rds 1/2 full etc or is it really best to discharge every time (As you said earlier Mr Happy)

Cheers everyone for your input :thumbsup:
Dave


----------



## Mr Happy (Jan 21, 2009)

Those capacities might increase a little after a few cycles, but break-in capacities in the 1900-2000 mAh range are quite typical for AA Eneloops.

The C9000 will almost invariably hit its maximum voltage cut off point of 1.47 V before it reaches the -deltaV point with Eneloops. So you can top them up from any state of charge with no risk of missed termination.


----------



## krayzeemofo (Jan 21, 2009)

i just tried a break in with a new set of eneloops (dated in '06) and they were all around 1870mAh...


----------



## fireguy (Jan 22, 2009)

krayzeemofo said:


> i just tried a break in with a new set of eneloops (dated in '06) and they were all around 1870mAh...



I would try another break in and see if those numbers come up.


----------



## mikevelarde (Jan 22, 2009)

My experience with my 16 pcs. of eneloop AA dated code of 2008-01 is that they all registered only 1850 ~1900 mah during their break-in on my C-9000!! :thinking:

While my 4 pcs. eneloop AAA 800mah date code(2006-06) is a different story, their break-in capacity is 789~791~796~806 mah using C-9000!!

My 4 pcs Ansmann max-e LSD AAA 800mah got only 687~690~690~742 mah on break-in using the same C-9000( I can't find the date code of these China made cell)??

Is there a logical explanation on these inconsistency in capacities on the much newer eneloop AA??


----------



## mikevelarde (Jan 22, 2009)

The break-in result of my 16 pcs AA eneloop with 2008-01 date code only have capacities between 1850~1900 mah (using the C-9000)

The break in result of my 4 pcs AAA eneloop with 2006-06 date code is a different story. thei capacities is 789-791-796-801 (using the same c-9000).

The worse i think is my 4 pcs AAA ansmann max-e 800mah with no date code. the cell is made in CHINA. and their break-in capacities is 649-657-687-742(Still the same C-9000):sick2:

mikevelarde


----------



## Mike89 (Apr 20, 2009)

In doing the "break in" with new eneloops, is it do the "break in" first (which is charging first) or is it better to discharge first, then do the "break in"?


----------



## davegLED (Apr 20, 2009)

I thought about this when I charged my Eneloops. Whilst the low 0.1C won't do much harm I discharged mine first to be careful.


----------



## vali (Apr 20, 2009)

I discharged my fresh eneloops to know how much energy they had left too.


----------



## Hoggy (Apr 21, 2009)

I agree - do a discharge before doing a 'break-in' on the C9000. The break-in mode charges for 16 hours, period! (Temp cutoffs, notwithstanding.)

Recently, Silverfox posted something about Eneloops - and I assume other LSD cells by extension - having more problems with overcharge than regular NiMH.

So definitely do the discharge before a break-in with LSD cells.
And use break-in mode very sparingly on LSD cells.


----------



## 5.0Trunk (Apr 21, 2009)

Alittle off-topic but is Thomas Distributing the only place besides e-bay the sells the C9000?

Thanks


----------



## alfreddajero (Apr 21, 2009)

I also like to discharge the cells to get rid of any memory effect from sitting on the shelf.....I really dont check the date code on the batts that i buy. Thought it was just me doing this.....glad others are doing the same.


----------



## Bones (Apr 21, 2009)

5.0Trunk said:


> Alittle off-topic but is Thomas Distributing the only place besides e-bay the sells the C9000?
> 
> Thanks



They're actually a lot of venders these days, but it's almost always worth visiting amazon.com for a pricing perspective before shopping elsewhere:

A few links to get you started:

http://www.amazon.com ... mh-c9000

http://www.mahaenergy.com ... resellers

http://www.google.com/products... mh-c9000
.


----------



## SlowSteve (Aug 28, 2009)

:wave: Newbie, on this great site, lots of info, maybe too much sometimes.

I got the MH-C9000 from Thomas Dist. this week. Super fast shipping and with some other discounts on AAA Sanyo NiMHs and several storage case netted free shipping and 5% off off the sale price w/ the free bag. :thumbsup:


----------



## jonnyfgroove (Aug 28, 2009)

SlowSteve said:


> :wave: Newbie, on this great site, lots of info, maybe too much sometimes.
> 
> I got the MH-C9000 from Thomas Dist. this week. Super fast shipping and with some other discounts on AAA Sanyo NiMHs and several storage case netted free shipping and 5% off off the sale price w/ the free bag. :thumbsup:


 
Cool, I just got the same deal from TD. The storage case is a nice extra. 
What is the model number on your C9000 if you don't mind? Mine is 0G0C01.


----------



## SlowSteve (Aug 28, 2009)

jonnyfgroove said:


> Cool, I just got the same deal from TD. The storage case is a nice extra.
> What is the model number on your C9000 if you don't mind? Mine is 0G0C01.


 
Where to find this info? I am using it to break in some batteries atm.


----------



## jonnyfgroove (Aug 28, 2009)

SlowSteve said:


> Where to find this info? I am using it to break in some batteries atm.


 
It's on the sticker on the back of the charger. LOL, I'm doing a break in right now too.:twothumbs


----------



## SlowSteve (Aug 28, 2009)

jonnyfgroove said:


> It's on the sticker on the back of the charger. LOL, I'm doing a break in right now too.:twothumbs


Duh, fine print kills me these days. :shrug:

I thought I read you had to push some buttons a certain way and then turn around 3 times.....:hairpull:

0H0FA ...what do these mean anyway? Can someone decipher?


----------



## Yoda4561 (Aug 28, 2009)

More importantly, wtf is a "manaul" it sounds violent.


----------



## kymarkh (Sep 2, 2009)

Just got mine and it's 0H0FA also.


----------



## vali (Sep 2, 2009)

I got a 0H0GA a few months ago. Oddly enough it also says "manaul".


----------



## Mike89 (Sep 2, 2009)

Had mine a few months. It's "0H0BA" and also has the typo "manaul".


----------



## Bones (Sep 2, 2009)

The mighty original edition 0FAB01.

True negative delta-V primary termination, so don't bring me your aged and infirm.

20000mAh capacity, making even D-cells sweat.

Uh, whats a manaul?


----------



## TorchBoy (Sep 3, 2009)

Yoda4561 said:


> More importantly, wtf is a "manaul" it sounds violent.


That would be "man-awl". Manauls, on the other hand, are harmless and for the most part can be safely ignored. Edit: It's likely also an endangered species.


----------



## Mr Happy (Sep 3, 2009)

If anyone has a C9000 that says "manual" we would likely tell them it is a fake and not the genuine article


----------



## Yoda4561 (Sep 3, 2009)

Yeah, I just checked mine, it's the 2nd gen code whatever that was. It too says manaul.


----------



## Black Rose (Sep 4, 2009)

0G0KA and manaul here


----------



## wapkil (Sep 4, 2009)

Yup, OHOFA - "manaul".

9. _They shall be slaves for a given time, who (...) kill manaul birds, tear documents belonging to the headmen (...)_

I'm sure that I haven't thrown out the manaul that came with the charger and I definitely didn't kill or tear it but I don't know where I've put it :mecry: Will they believe me?


----------



## Bones (Sep 4, 2009)

wapkil said:


> Yup, OHOFA - "manaul".
> 
> 9. _They shall be slaves for a given time, who (...) kill manaul birds, tear documents belonging to the headmen (...)_
> 
> I'm sure that I haven't thrown out the manaul that came with the charger and I definitely didn't kill or tear it but I don't know where I've put it :mecry: Will they believe me?



Quickly man, print this:

http://www.mahaenergy.com ... mhc9000.pdf

Many more manauls:

http://www.mahaenergy.com ... support.asp
-


----------



## 45/70 (Sep 4, 2009)

I have a 0G0IA and two 0H0FA's. All reference the manaul, but I can't seem to find a manaul or a manual. All I have is three sets of instructions.

Does this mean I won't be able to operate my C-9000's in the pool improperly configured so that I may run the risk of electric shock while bursting non-rechargeable batteries causing injury to person and damage er, what?

TIA,

Dave


----------



## Vicvic (Sep 15, 2009)

0F0FA
0G0IA
...
0I0IA ? Is this the newest version? What is different? :shrug:


----------



## garjor (Oct 18, 2009)

Bought one, code OIOGA, also "manaul"
Printed user guide: "Copyright 1993-2008"


----------



## Larbo (Oct 18, 2009)

The charger I got this week is 0H0FA, hope this is the newest.


----------



## servaas (Oct 18, 2009)

Vicvic said:


> 0F0FA
> 0G0IA
> ...
> 0I0IA ? Is this the newest version? What is different? :shrug:


They are batch numbers, not version numbers. The MH-C9000 specification has not changed since mid 2007.

Servaas Products- Australian Distributor for Maha Powerex


----------



## wcrsx (Nov 28, 2009)

servaas said:


> They are batch numbers, not version numbers. The MH-C9000 specification has not changed since mid 2007.
> 
> Servaas Products- Australian Distributor for Maha Powerex


 
Just picked mine up today. woo hoo

So where do you find the version numbers?. Are they printed right on circuit board?


----------



## servaas (Nov 28, 2009)

Batch umbers are printed on the sticker, on the base of the charger body

Cheers

Jeff
Australian Distributor for MAHA Powerex


----------



## dalelovelace (Jan 21, 2010)

Just received this charger, started off doing a break in of some Powerex batteries that came with the charger. My wife swears the charger is "beeping" and the beeping is driving her crazy. I can not hear a thing coming from the charger, does anyone else hear a beep from their charger?


----------



## alank2 (Jan 21, 2010)

Hi,

This is normal. It makes high frequency pulsing noises when charging. Some people can hear high frequencies and other people cannot, so that would determine how annoying it can be. I can hear them, but it doesn't bug me too bad.

Good luck,

Alan


----------



## DiverDn (Jan 21, 2010)

dalelovelace said:


> Just received this charger, started off doing a break in of some Powerex batteries that came with the charger. My wife swears the charger is "beeping" and the beeping is driving her crazy. I can not hear a thing coming from the charger, does anyone else hear a beep from their charger?




I'm sorry, What did you say? Couldn't resist the setup. 

I had no idea that it made sounds when charging. I guess that is from working around loud machinery in my youth.


----------



## Magic Matt (Jan 21, 2010)

Mine doesn't beep.

Mind you, I don't know when mine was made. It may be I've just bought stock that was built by dinosaurs, who knows.

The code on mine is OIOGA ... or maybe 0I0GA ... or maybe 010GA ... perhaps somebody can enlighten me,


----------



## alfreddajero (Jan 21, 2010)

Mine doesnt beep......it would be a nice feature if it beeped when charging was complete.


----------



## Hollow Man (Jan 21, 2010)

No beeping but yeah, I can hear the high frequency noises as it charges, especially when it it begins.

-HM


----------



## Mr Happy (Jan 21, 2010)

It makes an intermittent whistling noise at a frequency right on the edge of hearing. Most likely if you are under 10 years old you will hear it loud and clear. If you are old and creaking like me it will be hard to detect. I hear it if I hold my head at the right angle about two feet from the unit.


----------



## Magic Matt (Jan 21, 2010)

So there is... I can't hear it, but my mic is picking it up and I can see it peaking a little on the 20-22.5kHz band of the graphic eq. Must be quiet though as my breathing is somewhat more visible on the EQ!


----------



## TorchBoy (Jan 21, 2010)

Magic Matt said:


> I can see it peaking a little on the 20-22.5kHz band of the graphic eq. Must be quiet though as my breathing is somewhat more visible on the EQ!


That's very interesting. I had no idea it was so high pitched. I wonder if it's the same frequency and volume with everyone's C9000.


----------



## Magic Matt (Jan 21, 2010)

My C9000 is literally only a couple of days old, so maybe the charger hasn't broken in yet. It's also possible that pitch may be inaccurate on my cheap EQ (Behringer isn't exactly top quality, unlike the Rode mic that is superb).

I wonder if it's also producing some lower frequency harmonics that would be more audible if the whistle got louder over time.


----------



## Conan (Jan 22, 2010)

Hhhmm, I've never heard my C9000 make any sort of noise. I guess I'm getting old. :thinking:


----------



## McAllan (Mar 4, 2010)

I hear the noise in mine too. Can't remember when I've bought it but that's also a reason for why I'm not using it very much since I've got no where to put it in my small apartment and not be able to hear it. Odly it's not bothering me when I go to bed. Guess the pillow and duvet dampens the high frequencies quite well.

Has anyone a suggestion for making it quieter? Have considered trying soaking the inductors in slow hardening epoxy to see if it helps.

The background lighting I've also turned down. All the way to the point where it became very dim and greenish. Can't remember the resistor value but if I remember correct it was something like 50-100 kOhm. Must admit I've considered turning it completely off but it's like the display requires a little light to be clearly visible in contrast to most LCD's of such kind. Perfect - no more need to put a piece of card board over the display when going to bed. Before it was lighting up the whole room.


----------



## 45/70 (Mar 4, 2010)

McAllan said:


> The background lighting I've also turned down. All the way to the point where it became very dim and greenish. Can't remember the resistor value but if I remember correct it was something like 50-100 kOhm......




Now that is an interesting C9000 mod that I would be interested in! :thumbsup: Often I have 3 C9000's going at once, while it may in the long run save on the cost of room lighting, it'd be nice to tone them down a bit. Anymore details would be appreciated. 

Dave


----------



## Bones (Mar 4, 2010)

45/70 said:


> Now that is an interesting C9000 mod that I would be interested in! :thumbsup: Often I have 3 C9000's going at once, while it may in the long run save on the cost of room lighting, it'd be nice to tone them down a bit. Anymore details would be appreciated.
> 
> Dave



I haven't tried it myself, but automotive window tint should provide a cheap 'n easy way to dim the display of the MH-C9000. It would also be non-invasive and completely reversible.

If you stop in at a center that applies it, I'm sure they would be more than pleased to give you enough film from end-cuts or other wastage to cover all your displays.

You could probably even choose the degree of darkness.


----------



## 45/70 (Mar 4, 2010)

Bones said:


> I haven't tried it myself, but automotive window tint should provide a cheap 'n easy way to dim the display of the MH-C9000. It would also be non-invasive and completely reversible.



Yeah, you or someone else suggested that a while back. Approaching the problem that way would prevent any warranty problems, as well. I did recently have to return a C9000, so I may still do that.

Dave


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Mar 4, 2010)

Bones said:


> automotive window tint should provide a cheap 'n easy way to dim the display of the MH-C9000.


 
Wal-Mart or target sells a product made by Safety First which is basically a fairly thick vinyl window tinting material. You cut the shape you want and it stick to the item by static electricity or such, and it peels right off with no residue. I use it on alarm clocks and overly-bright AV equipment displays. Works great.


----------



## Apollo Cree (Mar 4, 2010)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Wal-Mart or target sells a product made by Safety First which is basically a fairly thick vinyl window tinting material. You cut the shape you want and it stick to the item by static electricity or such, and it peels right off with no residue. I use it on alarm clocks and overly-bright AV equipment displays. Works great.



Would that be in automotive or in home supply?


----------



## McAllan (Mar 5, 2010)

45/70 said:


> Now that is an interesting C9000 mod that I would be interested in! :thumbsup: Often I have 3 C9000's going at once, while it may in the long run save on the cost of room lighting, it'd be nice to tone them down a bit. Anymore details would be appreciated.



It is really easy. It's just a high value resistor in series with the LEDs for background lighting. Anyone capable of handling a soldering iron should have no problem.

Yes you loose the warranty but I don't care about that. If it breaks I'll have to send it out of the country so then buying a new one won't be so much more expensive. A dark foil will lower the contrast which is not ideal either.

I'll see if I can take some pictures of it soon and verify the value so others don't have to experiment too much finding a suitable value. The screws for disassembling is under the rubber feet.


----------



## McAllan (Mar 5, 2010)

McAllan said:


> I'll see if I can take some pictures of it soon



As promised here's how to: Guess the images pretty much speech for themselves:












As for disassembly there are screws under the rubber feet. Couldn't hardly be:twothumbs easier.
If your soldering abilities isn't completely down the drain it's even possible to reverse it without anybody knowing anything :devil:

Edit:
As you can see the resistor I've chosen is a 5.6 kOhm - "only" off by a factor 10 from my original bad memory guess


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Mar 5, 2010)

> Originally Posted by *Turbo DV8*
> 
> 
> _Wal-Mart or target sells a product made by Safety First which is basically a fairly thick vinyl window tinting material. You cut the shape you want and it stick to the item by static electricity or such, and it peels right off with no residue. I use it on alarm clocks and overly-bright AV equipment displays. Works great._





Apollo Cree said:


> Would that be in automotive or in home supply?


 
Sorry, I realized today I needed to come back and clarify, since it's not located where one might expect. "Safety First" is a product line aimed at infant and baby safety, hence it is located with the baby stuff.


----------



## Turbo DV8 (Mar 5, 2010)

Turbo DV8 said:


> Sorry, I realized today I needed to come back and clarify, since it's not located where one might expect. "Safety First" is a product line aimed at infant and baby safety, hence it is located with the baby stuff.


 
Went to Target tonight and did not find the tinting. This may be a seasonal item, spring/summer only.


----------



## 45/70 (Mar 5, 2010)

McAllan said:


> As promised here's how to: Guess the images pretty much speech for themselves:



Thanks for the pics and value info, McAllan. That seems simple enough that I may go ahead and do that on my two older C9000's, as they seem to have proven themselves. While I'm not the steadiest at soldering, I think I can handle that. If I can solder SMD's with a 15 Watt iron, I guess I can solder a resistor in place! 

Dave


----------



## AlexLED (Apr 4, 2011)

Hi Folks, sorry if this has been asked, I browsed through about a zillion threads but couldn't find an answer: 

I have recently bought this charger - but with the label from the german vendor ELV and it does not seem to have the firmware revision printed on the back. It only says "A04-3713431-550". 

*Is there any way to display the firmware revision ??*


----------



## SilverFox (Apr 4, 2011)

Hello Alex,

To read the version number you need to disassemble the unit. The version number is on the printed ciruit board.

Tom


----------



## AlexLED (Apr 4, 2011)

Ah, thanks, Tom, I could have thought of that !
Usually my new electrical gadgets get disassambled within hours after arrivals anyway.... :naughty:

It seems, I have the "Rev. 9" aka "E09" ? Other than that, I can only find 039-0001-003 printed on my circuit board.
Edit2: As I found in another thread, it seems the code "1009" -> Sept 2010 would be more important. 
But which Revision code would that be ??

By the way: the charger uses a Sonix SN8P 1808 micro-controller (8 bit / 12 bit ADC)


----------



## Mikl1984 (Apr 5, 2011)

AlexLED said:


> it seems the code "1009" -> Sept 2010
> But which Revision code would that be ??


You have latest one, produced on 9th *week* 2010 Maha-MH-C9000-Disassembled


----------



## dragonfruit (Nov 29, 2011)

Have you all noticed, that the springs in MH-C9000 damage/deform the plastic wrapping of batteries when removing the batteries from the charger? Couldn't they really design it better? Is there any easy solution to that problem?


----------



## NoixPecan (Nov 29, 2011)

@dragonfruit : Yes, removing an AA battery (*) from the MH-C9000 often harms the plastic lip around the negative terminal. With some battery brands however, the plastic wrapping stops before the negative terminal (there is no lip) and those can be removed smoothly. So I tried to circumcise my new AA batteries with a hobby knife, before using them in the MH-C9000, and it worked well.

(*) No problem with AAA batteries, since they are removed by lifting the positive terminal.


----------



## Mr Happy (Nov 29, 2011)

NoixPecan said:


> @dragonfruit : Yes, removing an AA battery (*) from the MH-C9000 often harms the plastic lip around the negative terminal.



It shouldn't. When you insert an AA battery the positive end goes in last, and when you remove an AA battery the positive end comes out first. If you do it right the negative end is never scraped across the contact spring. I have loads of AA batteries and I have never damaged the insulation on any of them in the C9000.


----------



## NoixPecan (Nov 29, 2011)

Mr Happy said:


> When you insert an AA battery the positive end goes in last, and when you remove an AA battery the positive end comes out first.


I do this for AAA (as I told) but never for AA. This is because I prefer scraping the battery than the charger itself. Interestingly, although all versions of the C9000 manual advise the same way for AAA, for AA it depends of the version you read...


----------



## Mr Happy (Nov 29, 2011)

NoixPecan said:


> This is because I prefer scraping the battery than the charger itself.



If you do it right there is no scraping of the charger or the battery. Every time something mechanical gets scraped a thousand spirits of technical gadgets suffer an agonizing death.


----------



## 45/70 (Nov 29, 2011)

Mr Happy said:


> If you do it right there is no scraping of the charger or the battery.



As Mr H says, if you press firmly towards the negative contact when installing, or removing cells, there is no scraping.

Regardless of what the "manaul" (as it's spelled on the back of the charger) says, for both AA and AAA cells, when installing cells, place the negative end in first, and when removing cells, remove the positive end first. In both instances, press firmly towards the negative contact. Your cells (and the charger, as well) will appreciate the added effort.

Dave


----------



## dragonfruit (Nov 29, 2011)

Mr Happy said:


> It shouldn't. When you insert an AA battery the positive end goes in last, and when you remove an AA battery the positive end comes out first. If you do it right the negative end is never scraped across the contact spring. I have loads of AA batteries and I have never damaged the insulation on any of them in the C9000.



I can't remove the positive end first for AA - the black plastic edge of the charger prevents from doing that, and no I can't press firmly enough towards the negative contact to make the positive end escaping the charger plastic edge. My charger batch number is 0I0GA. Perhaps you have shorter batteries?:shrug:
Anyway, let's be honest - it is simply a poor design these contacts.


----------



## Mr Happy (Nov 29, 2011)

dragonfruit said:


> I can't remove the positive end first for AA - the black plastic edge of the charger prevents from doing that, and no I can't press firmly enough towards the negative contact to make the positive end escaping the charger plastic edge. My charger batch number is 0I0GA. Perhaps you have shorter batteries?:shrug:
> Anyway, let's be honest - it is simply poor design.



I don't think I have shorter batteries, I've used the same technique with batteries of all kinds.

When removing an AA cell I grasp it firmly by the neck with my fingers touching the charger housing either side of the positive contact spring. I then squeeze and roll my fingers upwards against the charger, forcing the battery downwards against the negative contact spring. Once the battery clears any obstructions at the positive end I lift it up and out. (In this procedure, "upwards" means along the line of the battery towards the positive end, and "downwards" is the reverse direction towards the negative. It also needs a firm grip on the battery and is difficult with slippery fingers. Wipe your fingers dry first.)


----------



## NoixPecan (Nov 29, 2011)

45/70 said:


> As Mr H says, if you press firmly towards the negative contact when installing, or removing cells, there is no scraping.


I am used to do exactly that with my BC-900, but the springs of my MH-C9000 are _much_ harder. I tried Mr H's method (whom I thank for the detailed explanation) and after a few attempts, I finally succeeded.  I did not like the amount of strain it put on the springs, though.

YMMV, but I still prefer clearing the negative terminals of my batteries. It is a one-time effort, and they become very easy to remove. Not only from the MH-C9000, but also from a few of my gadgets, the battery holders of which are poorly designed, and give me no choice but pulling the negative terminal.


----------



## 45/70 (Nov 29, 2011)

NoixPecan said:


> I did not like the amount of strain it put on the springs, though.



Hi Noix. Whatever works for you, I guess. I can't imagine that briefly compressing the negative spring has much of an effect on it though. I've been using Maha C9000's for several years now, and have not encountered any problems with spring pressure.

Dave


----------



## dragonfruit (Nov 29, 2011)

NoixPecan said:


> I am used to do exactly that with my BC-900, but the springs of my MH-C9000 are _much_ harder. I tried Mr H's method (whom I thank for the detailed explanation) and after a few attempts, I finally succeeded.  I did not like the amount of strain it put on the springs, though.



I also eventually succeeded by forcing really hard the battery downwards against the negative contact spring, but I also don't like it. Shame on you designers to design it so poorly. Haven't they tested this design before manufacturing it?


----------



## Mr Happy (Nov 29, 2011)

dragonfruit said:


> I also eventually succeeded by forcing really hard the battery downwards against the negative contact spring, but I also don't like it. Shame on you designers to design it so poorly. Haven't they tested this design before manufacturing it?



It seems like a bad design, and maybe it is. However, it is important to have a really good electrical contact in a device like the C9000 and high spring pressure is helpful in that regard. As it stands I always rotate my batteries in the slot before starting a charge or discharge program, and on occasions when I have not rotated them enough the program has sometimes gone wrong due to high contact resistance.

So while I sometimes think the battery springs could be designed better, I reserve judgement about whether this is really a mistake or simply a case of trading off one problem against another.


----------



## samgab (Nov 30, 2011)

I've never had the slightest issue, concern, or difficulty inserting or removing cells from the C9000.
Just another perspective on the "design flaw".

(I do have trouble with some of my previous chargers that have the long travel sliding terminals.)


----------



## dragonfruit (Nov 30, 2011)

samgab said:


> I've never had the slightest issue, concern, or difficulty inserting or removing cells from the C9000.
> Just another perspective on the "design flaw".



Perhaps you have only batteries with highly embossed negative connection, and slippery, thin plastic around it - then M-HC9000 does not cause the problem - I also have a few of such batteries.


----------



## dragonfruit (Nov 30, 2011)

Mr Happy said:


> It seems like a bad design, and maybe it is. However, it is important to have a really good electrical contact in a device like the C9000 and high spring pressure is helpful in that regard.



I am not complaining about the high spring pressure, but rather the poor design of the spring shape, which is always trying to cause damage to the plastic on the battery when battery is removed the same way it is inserted (and in accordance with the manual). 
Somehow other manufacturer's chargers (and cheaper ones than this one) do not have this problem, and also do not cause contact problems any more than C9000. So it certainly is a problem, which could have been avoided.


----------



## samgab (Nov 30, 2011)

dragonfruit said:


> Perhaps you have only batteries with highly embossed negative connection, and slippery, thin plastic around it - then M-HC9000 does not cause the problem - I also have a few of such batteries.



I have eneloops, Energizer 2450's, Sony CycleEnergys, and Fujicells.


----------



## shelm (Feb 7, 2012)

Question, would anyone happen to know what exactly happens when we do cycling? (Cycle Mode, MH-C9000)

Does the C9000 rest too two hours between reverse charge directions?


----------



## bruintennis (Feb 7, 2012)

My MH-C9000 batch (version) code is 0K0GA. Purchased 1/2012 from Thomas Distributing.


----------



## bullseye_1 (Dec 16, 2012)

Hi. just new here. I have new MH-C9000 and it have software version 0L0FA.


----------



## Billspider (Dec 16, 2012)

Hi, I also purchased a Maha Powerex C9000 from Thomas Distributing on Nov 23, 2012
The code on the back is OLOEA


----------



## Billspider (Dec 16, 2012)

As you can see from the above post my charger is almost new. 
I find that either placing AA batteries in, or removing from charger it is easier to place or remove negative end first.
Does it really matter ?


----------



## Power Me Up (Dec 16, 2012)

Billspider said:


> I find that either placing AA batteries in, or removing from charger it is easier to place or remove negative end first.
> Does it really matter ?



It doesn't matter too much. I insert the negative end first because doing it the other way can (eventually) damage the wrapper on the cell. I also remove the positive end first for the same reason - it does take a bit more effort to do though.


----------



## B-52 (May 21, 2013)

Mr Happy said:


> I don't think I have shorter batteries, I've used the same technique with batteries of all kinds.
> 
> When removing an AA cell I grasp it firmly by the neck with my fingers touching the charger housing either side of the positive contact spring. I then squeeze and roll my fingers upwards against the charger, forcing the battery downwards against the negative contact spring. Once the battery clears any obstructions at the positive end I lift it up and out. (In this procedure, "upwards" means along the line of the battery towards the positive end, and "downwards" is the reverse direction towards the negative. It also needs a firm grip on the battery and is difficult with slippery fingers. Wipe your fingers dry first.)




Mr. Happy the Way you explained installing and removing AA's with your MaHa C9000.. This is exactly the Way i install & remove my Batteries in my C9000 as Well it's good practice to have clean hands & fingers no extra Oil's like from eating potato chips  or popcorn give the battery a firm grasp with your Right hand if your Right Handed and place your Left hand on the Charger pull back slightly then up with your right hand it should come out as you Explained.. Perfect every Time..  B


----------



## B-52 (May 21, 2013)

The Code on my Wizard One is ( OLOCA )...


----------



## N8N (May 21, 2013)

OLOHA just purchased from Amazon last week and it still says "manaul" come on Maha someone change the printing on the sticker... sheesh 

In other news I find that it's reporting battery capacity uniformly less than "sticker" on everything I've fed through it - mostly AA and AAA Eneloops but also two old Nikon branded NiMHs (those I understand though, they have been pretty much ignored as they did not work for the purpose for which I purchased them... I'm honestly not sure what to do with them, but i ran them through a break in cycle just on principle)

I still have 8 more Eneloop AAs to run through a break in cycle... should have bought two chargers but that's just silly.


----------



## leor604 (May 24, 2013)

Just received a C9000 yesterday so, my first task was to try and evaluate/resurrect some questionable batteries. Some read "high" so I put those aside for disposal. A few Energizer AAA's would initially be recognized when they were inserted but, regardless of which cycle I try to initiate, after a few seconds the charger goes back to the battery insertion state with "mode" flashing. I cannot charge, discharge, cycle, etc. The charger allows me to input the various settings but then within a few seconds of the cycle starting, it jumps back to flashing "mode" as if the battery was just inserted. I can charge these batteries in a "regular" charger but they have a reduced capacity (my son uses them in his Beats headphones but they don't last long). Any ideas or wisdom? Thanks.


----------



## SilverFox (May 24, 2013)

Hello Leor604,

Welcome to CPF.

There has always been a problem with AAA cells making contact in the charger. What you describe seems most likely that the cells are making contact for a short while then contact is lost. You can peel the shrink wrap away from the - end of the cell to help make better contact and some of us have "adjusted" the contacts in an effort to make better contact.

Tom


----------



## leor604 (May 25, 2013)

Thanks, Tom.

I don't think it's a contact issue. The AAA cells have no wrap at all on the entire bottom surface of the cell, and I also ran into the same issue with a couple of AA's. I did eventually manage to get one of the AAA's to go through a break in cycle but the capacity came back as only 480mah on a 950 rated cell so I think these are just dead cells. I guess I was expecting a "high" display instead of the charger rejecting the cell and going back to the flashing "mode" display.

Cheers

Leo.


----------



## Power Me Up (May 25, 2013)

I haven't seen it myself, but I've seen reports by others that if the internal resistance of cells is too high, it can cause the C9000 to reset and start the process over again. If you did manage to get a really high resistance cell to not reset, I wouldn't expect you to get any capacity out of it on the C9000, but maybe the resistance dropped sufficiently after the break in to allow it to do a discharge. With the one that you did manage to do a break in on, can you now do a normal discharge and charge with it?


----------



## leor604 (May 26, 2013)

No, I stuck the broken-in AAA in the charger this morning and this time got a HIGH display. 

I guess either a HIGH display or continous resetting means the same thing - dead cell - but I prefer the HIGH display because it then shuts down that slot. When a cell resets the charger, the charger just keeps looping (reset, 1000 ma charge, reset, 1000 ma charge, .....) and I am guessing this is not as safe as a shutdown.


----------



## Mr Happy (May 26, 2013)

leor604 said:


> No, I stuck the broken-in AAA in the charger this morning and this time got a HIGH display.
> 
> I guess either a HIGH display or continous resetting means the same thing - dead cell - but I prefer the HIGH display because it then shuts down that slot. When a cell resets the charger, the charger just keeps looping (reset, 1000 ma charge, reset, 1000 ma charge, .....) and I am guessing this is not as safe as a shutdown.



The C9000 apparently has two levels of battery rejection: HIGH resistance, and "not recognized as rechargeable". The second case, not recognized, is indicated by a reset and a flashing display. You can see this reset mode if you try to charge an alkaline battery. The charger will do the same thing. You could consider it to be worse than HIGH, or "VERY HIGH".


----------



## TakeTheActive (May 29, 2013)

leor604 said:


> No, I stuck the broken-in AAA in the charger this morning and this time got a HIGH display...


What's the FIRST voltage reading after you insert this AAA?


----------



## B-52 (May 29, 2013)

leor604 said:


> No, I stuck the broken-in AAA in the charger this morning and this time got a HIGH display.
> 
> I guess either a HIGH display or continous resetting means the same thing - dead cell - but I prefer the HIGH display because it then shuts down that slot. When a cell resets the charger, the charger just keeps looping (reset, 1000 ma charge, reset, 1000 ma charge, .....) and I am guessing this is not as safe as a shutdown.





I done a test On my C9000 with 1 of my AAA eneloops i inserted into each slot and it showed a good Contact on each one of them the Voltage read back was good as well During the Discharge & the Charge i put it threw). But before i done the test in the MaHa i checked Voltage with my ZTS tester the battery showed 80% when i put battery on charge i set it @ 400mA and charged it for a 4 min. Test in doing that i checked again with the ZTS and it was showing a 100% reading the Voltage was @ 1.40 so i knew it needed to go a little more but it was enough for my Test..

Leor604 what you could do is try is Calling MaHa's Customer No. 1.800.376.9992 When it ask for you to Type in the Extension No. Type in 204 Eric should answer if Delen answers ask if you could talk to him there on Pacific Time so for me when it's Noon it's 10:00 out there in CA but let Eric know what your charger is doing if have the Receipt to it ask him if he can Send you out a New one or if you can send yours in and you might put one of your eneloops in there with the Charger let him know if you decide to send it put it in battery holder and attach a Note.! He can check it out and he might just send you out a new one..

Give that a Try and Good Luck B:tinfoil:


Update: Leor604 i wanted to add Before you contact MaHa and Eric Take your C-9000 with it unplugged and tilt it to were you can see the Positive Contact plates the one's with the 4 small nipples). Take a small non sharp instrument or one of your fingers and see if the plate on each slot moves if they do they shouldn't especially if they move forward i asked Eric on this because my first C-9000 i got the plates Moved he said that wasn't Good he had me test the Negative plates they were Ok but he said with the Nature of the Positive plates he would send me a New C-9000 but i told him since i got it @ Batteries Plus i would make them exchange it).. too add >> 

The Manager exchanged it but he was not happy with doing it.. I told him the reason i returned it,, It didn't make a Dent so i mentioned it to Eric and he said from Now on we'll take of it.. I'm also going to get my Immedion's from MaHa it's just as easy to have them sent to me as to get them Locally which the Dunt's :thumbsdow over @ Batteries Plus don't have,,,,


----------



## leor604 (May 30, 2013)

TakeTheActive said:


> What's the FIRST voltage reading after you insert this AAA?



Sorry, I'm new to all this stuff so you'll have to be more specific. Voltage when? On a discharge cycle with a fully charged cell? Not sure if I still have this cell at home as I put it in a bag with a bunch of other dead cells for my wife to take to her work and recycle. I'll check when I get home.


----------

