Re: Need quick response, please

[Victor Tikhonov <vtikhono@lsil.com>]

Thanks all, will do OCV readings then.

Victor

Rick Pryor wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Schwarze" <sde@home.com>
> To: <ev@listproc.sjsu.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2001 12:49 PM
> Subject: Re: Need quick response, please
> 
> > At 02:40 PM 5/31/2001, you wrote:
> > >Thanks for quick reply,
> > >
> > >Sure, I realize that. I should have been more clear - I'd give each
> > >battery about identical time under load, say 5-10 seconds and
> > >capture readout whatever it is (while voltage slowly keep falling).
> > >
> > >The key is to make conditions identical, I'm interested only
> > >in differences. So is the method above any more beneficial
> > >vs just OCV reading?
> >
> > I don't think it's worth your trouble.  A .5 amp load for a few seconds on
> > that size of battery is not going to tell you much.  Given that all of the
> > batteries have been charged about equally and been sitting about the same
> > length of time, I'd base my decision on equal no-load voltage and be
> pretty
> > confident in it.
> >
> > -David
> 
> Hi Victor and others,
>     I would agree with the highest equal no-load voltage method. That is the
> way I shopped for a couple of battery cores to experiment with. I knew that
> the batteries had been sitting for a specific period of time, so I selected
> (in my case) the newest, cleanest looking batteries and tested them first. I
> found two that were within a couple hundreds of a volt of each other, and
> these also had a hydrometer eye that indicated that they were "okay", at
> least on the one cell that the eye was submerged in. So far, so good. They
> are fine for the light use they have been given.
> 
>     Rick