Maybe Fujitsu will, I've noticed Fujitsu's 2500mAh range available in Australia now, HR-3UTHB model. Lots of the blurb talks about made in japan, original etc.
Eneloop XX Vs Turnigy 2400 Cycle Testing
- Thread starter Power Me Up
- Start date
Help Support Candle Power Flashlight Forum
Maybe Fujitsu will, I've noticed Fujitsu's 2500mAh range available in Australia now, HR-3UTHB model. Lots of the blurb talks about made in japan, original etc.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
I strongly suspect that they are the same cell as the Eneloop XX...
Rosoku Chikara
Enlightened
I believe that you are absolutely correct. It is my understanding that they are manufactured in the same plant, and even on the same line at the FDK facility in Takasaki City, Japan.
When Panasonic acquired the Eneloop brand from Sanyo, FDK acquired the Eneloop manufacturing plant and manufacturing technology from Sanyo. (I know this sounds really odd, but Panasonic could not acquire the actual manufacturing plant due to antitrust issues that would have prevented the Sanyo/Panasonic merger from moving forward.)
Unfortunately, the FDK cells are not low cost. They usually cost more than Eneloops. (However, they are indeed the "original," whereas the new Eneloop cells that are made in China, may or may not be up to the standards set by the original Eneloop. Since Panasonic now owns the Eneloop brand, whatever Panasonic wishes to call an "Eneloop" is a "real" Eneloop. But, we may have to wait and see just how good the new Chinese Eneloop cells are.)
Last edited:
WalkIntoTheLight
Flashlight Enthusiast
Good explanation of why your tests show the capacity suddenly dropping to zero when using 1A discharge. At 0.1A discharge, they may still have plenty of life left.
I notice that they still seem to take a 1A charge okay, even when they can no longer do a 1A discharge. And they only heat up slightly more. Is that expected behaviour? I have some very old (non LSD) NiMH cells, and they can do a slow-discharge fine. However, they must also be charged slowly, or they quickly terminate their charge early. They would quickly overheat if I forced a 1A charge into them.
So it seems odd that the XX Eneloops are able to take a 1A charge, even when internal resistance has wrecked them.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Thanks!
Undoubtedly! Even at a 500 mA discharge, they still had substantial capacity remaining even after they failed a 1 amp discharge.
Yes, I'm not surprised by that. Higher IR just means that the charging voltage will be substantially higher than for a cell with low IR. Initially, the cells heat up more, but as they warm up, the IR drops and charging becomes more efficient than at the start.
It depends on how high the IR is - If it's high enough, then yes, you can't charge them at high rates. I had some old cells that I did some testing on and they had IR values over 1 ohm - they definitely wouldn't charge at 1A, but they couldn't even do a discharge at 0.5 A
With the UltraSmartCharger, I've programmed it to initially reject cells that have an IR over 300 milliohms (so that you can't accidentally recharge alkalines, etc) you can still override this to charge high IR cells - with the default settings, the charge current will be automatically reduced if the IR is over 400 milliohms. As the cells warm up and their IR drops, the charger will automatically increase the charging current to suit.
Fair comments about genuine or not XX batteries and indeed it looks like a surprise to have another brand exceed XX in cycle life. However, a couple of extra points here: what is the average capacity of Turnigy vs XX? So do we really compare the same thing here? I know XX state minimum 2400 but in practice it is more than 2500, at least those I have here, so if Turnigy is let's say average 2450mAh and XX registers 2530mAh or so, we have almost 100mAh extra which can be a huge difference in actual life. After all, 2530(XX)-1980mAh(standard eneloop)= 550mAh is enough to significantly drop the cycle life from 2100 down to 500 only! If just 550mAh are enough to cause this, it could make sense to expect lower cycle life when we compare a 2530mAh battery vs an 2450 one and in reality, if XX produced the same average to Turnigy the real XX cycle would be superior. I just find hard to believe, an equal capacity battery of another brand performs better to eneloop technology when eneloop is the only battery that claims the highest cycle life on standard eneloops and the same technology is used on XX, so at least part of that performance is expected to also show on XX. So, maybe the difference is due to Turnigy actually producing a lower overall capacity?
Anyway, good to know there is a good alternative nevertheless. It is not impossible for Turnigy to actually have produced a superior battery but if they did, I would expect they'd also produce a 1900mAh minimum capacity battery that surpasses standard eneloops too in total cycle life using that superior technology. I'm not aware of such a battery yet.
Anyway, good to know there is a good alternative nevertheless. It is not impossible for Turnigy to actually have produced a superior battery but if they did, I would expect they'd also produce a 1900mAh minimum capacity battery that surpasses standard eneloops too in total cycle life using that superior technology. I'm not aware of such a battery yet.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Yes, the Eneloop XX has more capacity than the Turnigy 2400 - you can see the difference in the graphs in my first post.
You're quite possibly right that the increase in capacity is relevant - getting higher capacity requires compromises in other areas, so it's quite possible that Sanyo had to make more compromises to get that little bit extra capacity.
BTW, for anyone looking for the Turnigy cells, I purchased mine from HobbyKing:
http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/stor...2400mAh_Low_Self_Discharge_ready_to_use_.html
There is now a Turnigy 2550 mAh cell, so it might be interesting to test it at some stage:
http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/stor...ow_Self_Discharge_ready_to_use_4pc_pack_.html
Looks like the price on the 2400 mAh cells has dropped significantly at their international warehouse - I'm guessing that they're clearing out stock now that the 2550 mAh cells are available!
You're quite possibly right that the increase in capacity is relevant - getting higher capacity requires compromises in other areas, so it's quite possible that Sanyo had to make more compromises to get that little bit extra capacity.
BTW, for anyone looking for the Turnigy cells, I purchased mine from HobbyKing:
http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/stor...2400mAh_Low_Self_Discharge_ready_to_use_.html
There is now a Turnigy 2550 mAh cell, so it might be interesting to test it at some stage:
http://hobbyking.com/hobbyking/stor...ow_Self_Discharge_ready_to_use_4pc_pack_.html
Looks like the price on the 2400 mAh cells has dropped significantly at their international warehouse - I'm guessing that they're clearing out stock now that the 2550 mAh cells are available!
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Sorry I didn't get around to taking the photo until now:
Full size version:
http://www.ultrasmartcharger.com/Eneloop XX and Turnigy 2400 Photo.jpg
Looks like the model code on the Eneloops are HR-3UWXB which would make them 2nd gen.
Edit: Date codes on 2 of the Eneloops are: 12-10 HM. The other 2 are: 13-08 EE
Last edited:
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Do you have access to the actual JIS C8708 testing standard? If so, can you confirm what rest periods are included in the test. From your text and the image that you posted, it appears that there isn't any rest after charging or discharging, except after the 16 hour 0.1C charge.
I'm thinking about running another test following that standard as closely as I can. The main difference would be that I won't be keeping to standard lab temperature - unless Panasonic or someone else wants to pay for the electricity bill to run my (Panasonic no less) air conditioner 24/7 for the duration of the test. Would take around 3 months or so for the Eneloop XX cells - maybe around a whole year(!) for standard Eneloops!
What temperature would that have be? I have full access to a rack in our computer room, the room is set to be 18 degrees C but normally it is around 26 in the racks.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Standard laboratory temperature is supposed to be 25 degrees C. I'm not sure what temperature the JIS standard requires though...
Rosoku Chikara
Enlightened
Well, the short answer is "No." But, I am not so good with "short answers," so please allow me to explain.
I did find a copy of JIS C8708 : 2007 (may nor may not be the current version) posted on the internet. Without paying the money to purchase a "legit" copy, it is hard to know if the copy I found is "real." But, it looks real enough to me. It is not in the best of shape (meaning, my browser does a poor job of rendering the subscript and superscript of its formulas... and in addition, I highly suspect that it is an OCR-->HTML file of a printed, or perhaps even copied, hard copy; so, for example, it often uses a forward slash "/" interchangeably with an italicized capital "I") and, of course, it is written in Japanese.
But, I too found the lack of any rest between cycles to be "interesting." I will have to look at it again, but unless I missed it, I am pretty sure there is no rest. In addition, the Japanese "maniac" (In Japan, "maniac" is used much like the word "fan," as in: "He is a fan of that sports team." Actually, I believe that the word "fan" comes from "fanatic," so "manic" and "fan" are quite similar. And, I think the word "flashaholic" qualifies just fine as a synonym of "maniac.") who did the testing that I posted made no mention of any rests, except for every 50th test. He simply stated that the "process is repeated."
I searched for the JIS C8708 standard, mainly because I wanted to make sure that I understood how the "maniac" was conducting his tests which he claimed were being done in accordance with JIS C8708, with the exception of temperature control.
I have no idea what kind of test equipment he has (or has built), but based on that raw data printout tape, I would say that any rests would have warranted some sort of notation there... And, from what I could see, there is no rest.
If we really want to know the answer to this, I am willing to call FDK. I have spoken to them before, and they are (in general) friendly enough. But, they are also extremely close mouthed about Eneloops and any production role that they may have played or still play. It is pretty obvious that they have signed some kind of non-disclosure agreement with Panasonic which prevents them from disclosing even the existence of any non-disclosure agreement. (You can readily understand why it might be a bit embarrassing for Panasonic if the general public were made aware of the fact that those wonderful "Panasonic Eneloop" cells are actually made by Fujitsu. This would greatly enhance the FDK brand image.)
It is a well known fact, however, that the FDK production facility is the true birthplace of the original Eneloops, and from what I have been able to gather, FDK has not been particularly limited by overall production capacity. Therefore, I believe that until this new plant opened in China, FDK has been the sole source of all Eneloops. However, like many other countries, it is far more expensive to manufacture in Japan, than in China. So, as whatever "contract" FDK had (or has) with Panasonic winds down, and Panasonic is free to purchase cells from elsewhere and call them "Eneloop," then, I think we will see more and more Eneloop production moving to China.
I doubt, however, that the Eneloops sold in the Japanese domestic market will ever be made in China. If Panasonic were to attempt that, I believe it would present FDK with a real opportunity to succeed with their own FDK brand cells. The reason is that many (perhaps even most) Japanese consumers prefer products made in Japan, and are willing to pay a premium for products made in Japan. This is really not some "nefarious" plot by the hyper-patriotic Japanese consumer, to prevent the entry of foreign products into Japan. Japanese actually often prefer foreign products, and remain the largest consumers of many premium foreign products. But, only when those foreign products are deemed superior to Japanese products.
The real driving force here, is an innate Japanese preference for enhanced quality, even very incremental differences in quality. Whereas American have a strong tendency to say something is "good enough" (or "good enough," given the lower price), Japanese rarely think that way. Even if they are destitute, and cannot afford better, they will still "endure in silence" until they *can* afford better; they still don't say something is "good enough."
(But, since they think very differently, they end up saying a lot of other things... much of which I disagree with, but I fear I have already taken this thread way, way too far off topic!)
Far be from me to stop you from conducting more tests based on JIS C8708, but frankly I don't see what we are going to accomplish. I am readily willing to posit the fact that I will only get 200 cycles, or so, from my Eneloop Pros. I didn't purchase them for their cycles.
Years ago, I purchased a number of what were then considered "top of the line" NiMH cells made by Panasonic. I think they were rated at something on the order of 1200 cycles. I was not yet a "Flashaholic" then, so while I did own a couple flashlights, I mainly used them in various electronic devices. They worked out very well for me, and I am convinced that they have easily paid for themselves, several times over. But, I would be very very surprised if any of them ever even approached 200 cycles. (None of the applications that I was using them in ever had the need for that rapid of discharge and charge rate. If I recharged once a week, that was extremely often.)
My biggest problem with them was their high self-discharge rate. This was especially a problem with flashlights which tended to sit around a lot without being used, but required a fair amount of capacity when needed. If the lights went out (thankfully, not often in Japan) or I needed to go out and look for something in the dark, I usually found that my flashlight went dead on me in a very short time. (The cells were nowhere near fully charged.) So, I ended up having to keep alkalines around for "spares."
But, once I learned about the existence of low self-discharge Eneloops, I realized that they would be a real "game changer" for me. I purchased a number of Eneloop Pro cells (some of which included chargers), and have never needed to purchase another alkaline cell since. (In addition to the cost of alkalines, disposal is a big issue in Japan. All batteries, even alkalines, need to be taken to an authorized recycling center. Believe it or not, some Japanese housewives are not beyond closely examining their neighbors' trash, and if they were to find that you simply threw your alkaline cells in with the regular trash, both you and your family could be "black-listed" for several generations... Slight exaggeration, but you get the idea.)
After I found this forum, I purchased a Maha MH-C9000 and checked all of my old Panasonic NiMH cells. I found that a large number were still in fine shape (around 90% rated capacity), but approximately half had deteriorated significantly, but to varying degrees. I suspect that the major cause of significant deterioration was a mediocre charger, not the number of recharge cycles. In addition, until I had the C9000 to establish reasonably accurate capacities, I was unknowingly mixing 90% capacity cells with 60% capacity cells. Today, I have marked each cell with a color paintmarker so that I can easily determine its current capacity.
So far, every new Eneloop that I have purchased (they are all Pros) has been discharged, run through the "Break-In" process, discharged, and "Analyzed." I try to do this for 8-12 cells at a time, because I then establish matched sets based on capacity. (And, having more cells to choose from at the time of matching, results in better matched sets.) All data from newly purchased cells gets recorded in an Excel spreadsheet, and to the extent possible, I attempt to keep track of which "matched set" went into which application. The cells themselves are not marked, except for a single green dot of paint near the positive terminal. (As you know, it is fairly difficult to mark the black Eneloop Pro cells.)
I have established consistent standards for each color, and should I find at some later date that a cell no longer rates a "green dot," it will receive an additional "blue dot" next to the green. And, so forth: from green, blue, yellow, orange, to red. So far, I only have one of the old Panasonic cells that is marked orange. I have no "reds." And, if my C9000 is ever reluctant to charge a cell due to high internal resistance, I intend to immediately recycle it.
It has been a couple years now since I marked all my old Panasonic cells, and I thought that I would have seen more dramatic changes in capacity, and even recycled some by now. Frankly, I would like to get rid of all those old cells (many of which are AAA) as soon as possible, so I placed quite a number of them in cheap AA adapters and used them in devices that normally require an AA cell. Unfortunately, I have found that they are not so easy to kill off. Perhaps it is because I am rather gentle with my charging (300 mA for AAAs), but they are not yet showing much change in capacity so far. (Unlike most Japanese consumers who are quite willing to throw away perfectly functional items and devices, my conscience will not allow me to recycle then while they are still proving themselves to be perfectly useful... so, I guess I am going to be stuck with them for some time yet.)
So, as crazy as it may sound, having gone to this much trouble, I am actually looking forward to the day when I can place an additional "blue dot" on one of my Eneloop Pros. But, I am fairly certainly that by that time, my blue paint-marker will have dried up, and I will need a new paint marker.
While I have always enjoyed camping and other outdoor activities that required a good flashlight, and I have always admired nice flashlights, I really don't get much chance to use one these days. I have, however, become thoroughly addicted to flashlights (thanks to this forum!) and I now have plenty of them. But, I am simply not a heavy user of discharge recharge cycles. While this may seem highly incongruous with my "investment" in Eneloop Pros, I see good cells as being analogous to ammunition in a firearm. If your handgun holds 14 in a clip, why load it with only 10? (Actually, I once knew someone who did that because they believed it reduced the stress on the magazine spring.) To me, it doesn't make any sense. If I think that there is even a remote possibly that I might need a gun, I want it fully loaded, and I am also going to carry at least two spare clips.
That is why I prefer Eneloop Pros. And, despite their higher cost, I am quite convinced that they are going to easily pay form themselves many times over. So, why not get "the best" in terms of capacity?
By the way, I do I think it is very interesting that other companies such as Turnigy may now be manufacturing good quality, high capacity LSD NiMH cells. Should this forum reach a general consensus that such cells are indeed reasonably consistent and reliable, I would certainly like to try some. But, unfortunately, they do not seem to be available in Japan, and even if they were, so far, it looks likely that they would be priced about the same as Eneloops.
Last edited:
Great test as always power me up.
And thanks to Rosoku Chikara for explaining the japanese JIS C8708 endurance test.
I have previously studied it in Japanese my self using google translate for a direct comparison to the IEC standard. And as far as I could tell they was exactly the same , this just confirms it once more.
Power Me Up and Rosoku Chikara as I translate it , JIS ( just as IEC ) only permits rest time every 50 cycle after charge and discharge.
Below are the two respective tests ( the JIS C8708 is a 2013 version ). I guess's Rosoku Chikaras english is a lot better than my japanese
Maybe he can tell us if he sees any difference between the two tests.
http://kikakurui.com/c8/C8708-2013-01.html
JIS C8708 ( 7.5.1 endurance test)
http://www.cnlumos.com/lumos/Battery Knowledge/Battery Standards/IEC61951-2-2003.pdf IEC ( 7.4.1.1 endurance test)
Power me up IEC also has an official accelerating endurance test procedure as shown in 7.4.1.2 at the link above. Maybe you should give that a closer look
And thanks to Rosoku Chikara for explaining the japanese JIS C8708 endurance test.
I have previously studied it in Japanese my self using google translate for a direct comparison to the IEC standard. And as far as I could tell they was exactly the same , this just confirms it once more.
Power Me Up and Rosoku Chikara as I translate it , JIS ( just as IEC ) only permits rest time every 50 cycle after charge and discharge.
Below are the two respective tests ( the JIS C8708 is a 2013 version ). I guess's Rosoku Chikaras english is a lot better than my japanese
Maybe he can tell us if he sees any difference between the two tests.
http://kikakurui.com/c8/C8708-2013-01.html
JIS C8708 ( 7.5.1 endurance test)
http://www.cnlumos.com/lumos/Battery Knowledge/Battery Standards/IEC61951-2-2003.pdf IEC ( 7.4.1.1 endurance test)
Power me up IEC also has an official accelerating endurance test procedure as shown in 7.4.1.2 at the link above. Maybe you should give that a closer look
Last edited:
Power Me Up
Enlightened
I can't read the Japanese standard, but I've had a look at the IEC standard that you've linked to.
An interesting difference that I can see between that standard and the test that Rosoku talked about is that the IEC standard says to discharge on cycles 2-48 for only 2 hours and 20 minutes (or if the cell voltage falls below 1.0 Volts) so I would expect that the cells wouldn't be fully discharged on each cycle.
This corresponds well with the text method outlined on the following page:
http://www.large-battery.com/what-is-battery-cycle-life-test.html
I would expect that if the cells aren't being fully discharged on each cycle, they would eventually end up being overcharged in later cycles - unless the charge acceptance was significantly lower than I've seen in the testing that I've been doing... Overcharging isn't good for the cell longevity, so I would expect that it would have a significantly adverse impact on the results...
Thanks for confirming!
Thanks for the links to those files!
It's interesting that for all of the "accelerated" tests, there is a full 24 hour rest on the 49th cycle - seems a bit odd to me if you're wanting the test to run in a reasonably short period of time!
The testing that I've been doing is closest to 7.4.1.2.3 with the following main differences:
* I'm not doing a 16 hour 0.1C charge for cycle 1.
* I'm not doing the 24 hour rest on the 49th cycle.
* I'm also discharging down to 0.9V instead of 1.0V
* I'm giving shorter rest periods.
Looks like the specified ambient temperature is 20 degrees C +/- 5 degrees. Cell surface temperatures are to be kept below 35 degrees C with forced air cooling if required to keep them below that limit.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Mainly out of curiosity, I think it would be nice to confirm that the cells that we buy are actually able to reach the number of cycles that the manufacturers claim when tested with the same methodology.
As far as I can tell ( using google translate ) JIS C8708 has the same procedure.
BTW I can recommend translate Japanese word for word , or in very short sentences ( using google translate ) , rather than in long sentences. A little troublesome , but more accurate.
They don't fully charge the cells either. They are charging them for only 3 hours and 10 minutes at a 0,25 C rate. And some of that charge will be wasted energy , not going in to the cell as charge ( thats one the the reasons you can't use charging current to measure capacity ).According to maha as much as 20-30 percent of the charging current could be wasted energy.
Actually I didn't noticed that before. I agree that is a little of odd for an accelerating test
Last edited:
That's a nice broad range, except the force air part, is totally doable without using an air conditioned lab. Perhaps not in Queensland ...
Power Me Up
Enlightened
The standard specifies charging for 3 hours and 10 minutes and discharging for 2 hours and 20 minutes - that's 190 minutes charging and 140 minutes discharging. Unless the charging efficiency is less than about 74% the cells will be left with an increasing residual charge after each cycle and you would eventually (IMHO) get to the point where the residual charge plus the 190 minutes of charging would overcharge the cells.
Perhaps with regular (non LSD) NiMH cells the charging efficiency is low enough not to overcharge them, but I would expect that Eneloops and other LSD cells would end up being overcharged.
I'm running some tests at the moment which should shed some light on the charging efficiency of Eneloops at low charging rates.
Power Me Up
Enlightened
Forced air isn't really hard - just set up a PC case fan above the charger to blow air over the cells all the time...
Definitely not... 25 degrees C just isn't going to happen in QLD over summer without air conditioning! :-( It's not even summer yet, and the temperature in non air conditioned parts of the house is currently at 27 degrees C - and that's at 4pm!
That will be interesting. Let us know about the results.
I have a hard time believing they intentionally will overcharge the cells to a point where it would be harmful ( meaning fewer cycles ).
Last edited:
