LSD Capacities

[UnknownVT]

I know lots of CPF'ers have posted capacities for various LSD (Low Self-Discharge) batteries -
but they seem to be scattered all over the place, isolated in various threads -
there doesn't seem to be a single thread where many reading have been collected.

So this is an attempt at doing that -
since many people already have their own readings -
hopefully this thread will get lots of input fairly quickly
and we may possibly see some consistency, or anomolies.

It shouldn't be too hard to get a reasonable clear and consistent format for any reports -
I think the relevant things other than the obvious capacity readings (mAh) are:

Equipment:
equipment name/model
version
when equipment was acquired
(perhaps experience using the equipment?)

Battery Tested:
battery name/model
if possible uniquely identify each battery (this may be important if multiple readings were taken for the same battery)
when battery was acquired
any other relevant battery info (eg: date code on battery - like eneloops)
estimated usage before test

Test:
discharge current used
(perhaps which batteries were in which slots, if relevant?)
when battery was last charged and any relevant conditions.

Any other suggestions - but don't want to make it too complicated, or a deterrent to posting results.

Here's my input to start this off -

===================================================

Maha C9000 - version: 0H0FA - received Jan/6/2009 from WiredQUBE - new to me.

All batteries were charged in sets in the Maha C9000 at 0.5C then left on the charger for 1-2 hours for their "top up" sequence - all the batteries had been previously fully charged recently on the Soshine SC-C3 Intelligent Rapid Charger

eneloop 2000mAh 2 sets - bought Oct/2007 (Costco pack) - date code 06-10SM = Oct/2006 -
fairly few cycles - set 1-4 used more than set 5-8 - mostly in dSLR until camera shutdown.
discharged in sets of 4, in order of the slots 1-4 at 400mA (=0.2C) -

1) 1859 mAh (308min)
2) 1882 mAh (314min)
3) 1870 mAh (310min)
4) 1873 mAh (312min)

5) 1878 mAh (311min)
6) 1867 mAh (311min)
7) 1900 mAh (315min)
8) 1861 mAh (310min)

DuraLoop (Duracell Pre-Charged made in Japan, white top) 2000mAh set 5-8 bought Nov/17/2008 - date code 7H07 - T S = 2007/Aug/07 -
newish very few cycles.
discharged in set of 4, in order of slots 1-4, at 400mA (=0.2C)

5) 1867 mAh (308min)
6) 1858 mAh (308min)
7) 1872 mAh (309min)
8) 1868 mAh (310min)

(as some may surmise I do have another set of DuraLoops 1-4 - but they are currently in my dSLR and I want to see their total shot count first before doing a discharge capacity test)

Kodak Pre-Charged 2100mAh 2 sets - 1-4 bought Jun/21/2007 - code 7E, 5-8 bought Sep/2/2007 - code 7F
set 1-4 used a lot for my reviews but normally only partially and lots of top-up type charging, set 5-8 - much less use - but twice in dSLR until camera shutdown.
discharged in sets of 4, in order of the slots 1-4 - at 400mA (=~0.2C)

1) 1966 mAh (325min)
2) 1942 mAh (324min)
3) 1993 mAh (330min)
4) 1907 mAh (318min)

5) 1951 mAh (322min)
6) 1961 mAh (326min)
7) 1994 mAh (329min)
8) 1944 mAh (323min)

Let's see your results please?

 

[TONY M]

Thanks Vincent.

I only have two different LSD batteries, Eneloops and Hybrios.

Equipment: Maha C-9000 (0H0DA). (Bought in Dec 2008 from UK website)

Battery Tested: Uniross Hybrio, says on packet "Made in China - C0120029" no markings or numbers on batteries (purchased on internet from UK site)

I bought the Uniross Hybrios last week (4xAA).
I do believe that they are eneloops (or a darn fine copy at least!

).

I ran them through a few cycles on the C9000, I then discharged at 400mA and the results were as follows.

Hybrios;

Discharge at 400mA.
Batt 1 1908mAh (slot no 4)
Batt 2 1911mAh (slot no 3)
Batt 3 1918mAh (slot no 2)
Batt 4 1884mAh (slot no 1)

Notice that batt 4 is lower than the others and it was charged on the first slot on the C9000. I had purposely chosen to put them in opposing slots as there has been talk of the C9000 reading low on the first slot.

Next time I put them in this way around and discharged again at 400mA.

Batt 1 1925mAh (slot no 1)
Batt 2 1956mAh (slot no 2)
Batt 3 1919mAh (slot no 3)
Batt 4 1919mAh (slot no 4)

These Hybrios have not been put through a break in cycle and I have only had them about 10 days.

****************************************

Now for two of my latest eneloops that are about 5 months old and were put through a break in cycle only a few weeks ago. They were last charged 10 days before discharging at 400mAh earlier today. I chose them as they have been through the fewest cycles of the eneloops that I have, app 10 cycles. I avoided slot 1 on the Maha C-9000 for this test.

Eneloops;

Discharge at 400mAh
Batt 1 1808mAh (slot 4)
Batt 2 1836mAh (slot 2)

Note that the first eneloop battery has always read slightly lower than the second battery (and my other eneloops as well).

Unfortunately I do not have any results of the capacity of the other eneloops but going by memory they are close to identical to the Hybrio's figures and in appearance they are also identical so I do think that they are probably the same batteries in a different wrapper.

 

[Eugene]

Here's some of the Enduro Titanium
Analyze Date Tested Capacity Rated Capacity % of Rated Capacity Analyze Date Tested Capacity Rated Capacity % of Rated Capacity
1) 2009-01-06 1272 2100 60.57%
2) 2009-01-06 1101 2100 52.43%
3) 2009-01-06 1632 2100 77.71%
4) 2009-01-06 1490 2100 70.95%
5) 2009-01-07 1284 2100 61.14%
6) 2009-01-07 1500 2100 71.43%
7) 2009-01-07 1127 2100 53.67%
8) 2009-01-07 1504 2100 71.62%
9) 2009-01-08 1179 2100 56.14% 2009-01-12 1791 2100 85.29%
10) 2009-01-08 1205 2100 57.38% 2009-01-12 1801 2100 85.76%
11) 2009-01-08 1137 2100 54.14% 2009-01-12 1800 2100 85.71%
12) 2009-01-08 1225 2100 58.33% 2009-01-12 1877 2100 89.38%
13) 2009-01-08 1283 2100 61.10% 2009-01-10 1853 2100 88.24%
14) 2009-01-08 1183 2100 56.33% 2009-01-10 1825 2100 86.90%
15) 2009-01-08 1146 2100 54.57% 2009-01-10 1727 2100 82.24%
16) 2009-01-08 1077 2100 51.29% 2009-01-10 1751 2100 83.38%

I put them all on a refresh/analyze cycle when I got them, and have since put 1/2 of them through a break in, thats the second cycle in the listing

 

[Black Rose]

Equipment: Maha C-9000 (0G0KA). (Bought in March 2008)

Battery Tested: Rayovac Hybrid - 2100mAh - purchased April 2008
batteries have approximately 20 to 25 cycles on them, used primarily in Wii remotes.

Test: C-9000 break-in when new:

1) 1996 mAh
2) 1998 mAh
3) 1993 mAh
4) 2006 mAh

C9000 break-in after 9 months of use:

1) 1937 mAh
2) 1952 mAh
3) 1930 mAh
4) 1946 mAh

 

[UnknownVT]

Many thanks for the input - please keep them coming.

Even if a particular battery has already been measured -
please don't hesitate in posting your results -
as it would be very interesting to have results from many different people of the same battery to see if there is consistency.

Thanks,

 

[Anders]

Maha C9000 - version:OGOB01 received 2007 in march.

Maha Imedion AA 2100 mAh
Received in december 2007

This is from 12-13-2007
"When charging and disharging in MAHA C-9000, I'vve got these very good results.

Refrefresh&Analyze:1000mA/500mA

1. 2243 mAh, 295 Minutes
2. 2223 mAh, 297 Minutes
3. 2208 mAh, 289 Minutes
4. 2244 mAh, 258 Minutes"



I just did a "break in" on this cells.
Cell:
1. 2251 mAh, 353 min
2. 2231mAh, 355 min
3. 2221 mAh, 346 min
4. 2251 mAh, 313 min

Very few cykles on them, remarcably results consider they are 2100mAh cells.

Anders

 

[Black Rose]

Equipment: Maha C-9000 (0G0KA). (Bought in March 2008)

Battery Tested: Sanyo Eneloop AA - 2000 mAh - purchased in 2nd quarter 2008.
Batteries have only had a break-in cycle and sat in storage as spares for approx. 6 months.

Test: Break-in when new:

41) 2041 mAh
42) 1996 mAh
43) 1960 mAh
44) 2007 mAh

Test: Discharge @ 500 ma followed by Refresh & Analyze using 1000 mA charge/500 mA discharge rates:

41) 1943 mAh
42) 1907 mAh
43) 1870 mAh
44) 1908 mAh

 

[UnknownVT]

Maha Imedion AA 2100 mAh
Received in december 2007
Very few cykles on them, remarcably results consider they are 2100mAh cells.

Thank you very much Anders -
those Imedions seem to test out quite consistently and significantly higher than their rated capacity -
this is really unusual since most batteries seem to test out lower than their advertised capacities.

Anyone got test results of eneloops and/or confirmed re-badges like DuraLoops or Sony EnergyCycle (blue made in Japan) (or Hybrio-Loops) that are above 2000mAh please?

EDIT to ADD -
Great! thanks, Black Rose - must have read my mind
I do see two eneloops that managed to just exceed 2000mAh....
(is the break-in cycle capacity different from the standard IEC 0.2C discharge capacity?)

any more please?

Thanks,

 

[Black Rose]

Of the 44 Eneloop AAs I have, only 4 exceeded 2000 mAh.

The other two came in at 2008 mAh and 2009 mAh.

They were all cells produced in the last half of 2007.

 

[Mr Happy]

Anyone got test results of eneloops and/or confirmed re-badges like DuraLoops or Sony EnergyCycle (blue made in Japan) (or Hybrio-Loops) that are above 2000mAh please?

When I bought some Eneloops in Japan last year the break-in cycle on the C9000 gave capacities ranging from 2005 mAh to 2015 mAh. Those are the best performing Eneloops I have.

 

[UnknownVT]

Of the 44 Eneloop AAs I have, only 4 exceeded 2000 mAh.
The other two came in at 2008 mAh and 2009 mAh.
They were all cells produced in the last half of 2007.

When I bought some Eneloops in Japan last year the break-in cycle on the C9000 gave capacities ranging from 2005 mAh to 2015 mAh. Those are the best performing Eneloops I have.

Thanks -
so the break-in cycle seems to show higher capacity than a regular charge then IEC 0.2C discharge?

Since a break-in cycle also uses the standard IEC discharge of 0.2C
and the difference is the charge rate of 0.1C for 16 hours....

 

[Mox]

MH-C9000 (0G0KA) - received 16 Jan 09 from Thomas Distributing

Delkin 2300mAh - Bought Jan 08 from same - has H07298 in black writing underneath the white wrapping. Batteries were received in a totally discharged state (less than 1.0V)

After initial break in:
1) 2024 mAh
2) 1995 mAh
3) 1982 mAh
4) 1967 mAh

After discharge at 500mAh:
1) 2005 mAh 262 min
2) 1988 mAh 262 min
3) 1982 mAh 259 min
4) 1971 mAh 259 min

 

[Mr Happy]

Thanks -
so the break-in cycle seems to show higher capacity than a regular charge then IEC 0.2C discharge?

Absolutely. The standard charge crams every last possible electron into the cell, achieving as close as possible to a fully saturated charge. It does this at the cost of overcharging the cell, but it eliminates any variations in end-of-charge detection methods between cells and chargers.

 

[UnknownVT]

I depleted the other set of DuraLoops in my Pentax K100D dSLR -
so I did a discharge to see the remaining capacity -
then charged them at 0.5C (=1A) -
because I was impatient to see results I started the discharge cycle after leaving the batteries in the charger for its topping up charge for only about 45minutes.

DuraLoops - bought Aug/22/2008 - date code - 7G05 - I N = 2007/July/05 - very few cycles - used twice in Pentax K100D dSLR until camera shutdown
discharged at 0.2C = 400mA in set of 4 - in same slot #s

1) 1775 mAh (293min)
2) 1804 mAh (301min)
3) 1793 mAh (297min)
4) 1787 mAh (297min)

Hmmmm... these seem a bit low for cells that I considered in good condition and had shown very good performance in the Pentax K100D dSLR (this was the set that did 1,169 shots - my highest ever, and this was 3-4 months after charge)....
perhaps my impatience and only allowing the cells to sit for 45 mins after charge was "Done" - didn't give them enough time for the topping up phase?
- but surely that can't account for nearly 100mAh deficiency?

 

[oldpal]

Just my 2-cents worth. Wouldn't it make more sense when comparing cell capacities to do a break-in cycle (IEC standard analysis) so we all are starting with completely charged cells.

Hugh

 

[Mr Happy]

but surely that can't account for nearly 100mAh deficiency?

Ah, but yes it can. That exactly matches my experience with the MH-C9000. A charge of Eneloops will tend to terminate on high voltage at 1.47 before the batteries have a chance to absorb that final 150 mAh or so. You do need to let them finish the 2 hour top off to get the absolute maximum charge.

 

[Anders]

perhaps my impatience and only allowing the cells to sit for 45 mins after charge was "Done" - didn't give them enough time for the topping up phase?
- but surely that can't account for nearly 100mAh deficiency?

Hello Vincent.

I think it is best to let them sit for two hours after "Done".

Anders

 

[UnknownVT]

Ah, but yes it can. That exactly matches my experience with the MH-C9000. A charge of Eneloops will tend to terminate on high voltage at 1.47 before the batteries have a chance to absorb that final 150 mAh or so. You do need to let them finish the 2 hour top off to get the absolute maximum charge.

I think it is best to let them sit for two hours after "Done".

Thank you to both Mr Happy and Anders for the sage advice -
if nothing else this shows that the 2 hours' worth of topping up charge is important to get the remaining 150mAh (~7.5%?) or so worth of capacity into the batteries (well, ok - other than my ignorance )

Of course the obvious comment about this would be the Maha C9000 at 0.5C charge rate is really then a 4 hour charger - yes, well strictly speaking this is true - but I think I prefer a charger that charges batteries at first termination to about 93% capacity - but is kind to the cells by having strategies to prevent over-charge.

Thank you gentlemen.

 

[UnknownVT]

Just my 2-cents worth. Wouldn't it make more sense when comparing cell capacities to do a break-in cycle (IEC standard analysis) so we all are starting with completely charged cells.

I think this is a valid point - using an IEC break-in cycle would show the IEC standard capacity - so I would encourage anyone to post those - especially if you already have results - since hopefully it's minimal effort and would add valuable information.

However results from normal charging are equally valuable - since those measured capacities are likely to be the ones we realistically use/get (unless of course one uses only 0.1C charge at 16 hours all the time?)

A good example is my measurement of DuraLoops after only allowing about 45 minutes' worth of topping-up charge sequence - resulting in lower capacities - please see post #14 above - I am sure experienced people would have allowed the full 2 hours' top-up - but impatience or ignorance as in my case - would have pulled the batteries when the "DONE" sign is shown.

I think we should welcome BOTH - they are equally valid.

 

[UnknownVT]

DuraLoops - bought Aug/22/2008 - date code - 7G05 - I N = 2007/July/05 -
1) 1775 mAh (293min)
2) 1804 mAh (301min)
3) 1793 mAh (297min)
4) 1787 mAh (297min)
Hmmmm... these seem a bit low
perhaps my impatience and only allowing the cells to sit for 45 mins after charge was "Done" - didn't give them enough time for the topping up phase?

Same set of DuraLoops -
this time I charged them at the same 0.5C (=1A)
but left them in the charger for the full topping-up period of 2 hours -
actually slightly over -
allowed the batteries to rest for over 2 hours
then did a discharge at 0.2C = 400mA -

1) 1835 mAh (302min)
2) 1862 mAh (309min)
3) 1847 mAh (305min)
4) 1847 mAh (306min)

FWIW - I noted the voltage readings at 210 mins (3.5 hours) into the discharge -
1) 1.17V; 2) 1.18V; 3) 1.18V; 4) 1.18V
- so these would seem pretty healthy.