Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cadovax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrba!cadovax!keithd
From: keithd@cadovax.UUCP (Keith Doyle)
Newsgroups: net.consumers,net.physics,net.analog
Subject: Re: lifetime of rechargeable batteries
Message-ID: <302@cadovax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 21-Nov-84 14:32:59 EST
Article-I.D.: cadovax.302
Posted: Wed Nov 21 14:32:59 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Nov-84 03:02:16 EST
References: <251@umd5.UUCP>
Organization: Contel Cado, Torrance, CA
Lines: 20
Xref: genrad net.consumers:1498 net.physics:2112 net.analog:71


>So stop assuming bad karma from the battery makers until you understand
>the technicals.  I suppose they could stick in 7 cells ( 7 x 1.2 = 8.4 )
>but that's hard to do in two stacks.  (There would have to be an odd cell 
>somewhere.  Sometime pry apart a dead 9-volter to see what I mean...)
>If they went to 8 cells ( 8 x 1.2 = 9.6 ) the OVERvoltage might burn out
>something...

I have no particular problem with the different VOLTAGE output of
ni-cads, 9.6 volts (or even 8.4) is FINE as far as I'm concerned.
Even 7.2 is better than nothing.

I'm talking about the apparent (note: apparent) SHORT recharge life
of average consumer ni-cads (I've experienced about a half dozen recharges
and then they no longer hold a charge).  I say apparent because I've yet to
try the 10 ohm discharge trick.  (But I will!  I promise!)

Keith Doyle
{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!keithd
"You'll PAY to know what you REALLY think!"