Why are there no protected NiMH?

drmaxx

Enlightened
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
546
Location
Home of chocolate and chalets
The new LSD batteries are almost perfect: Reasonable energy content, that does not disappear during storage & good performance. The only thing I am concerned is that they're still prone to deep discharge.
Question:
* How badly are LSDs (eneloops) affected by deep discharge (e.g. forget to turn off the flashlight....)?
* Why are there no protected NiMH with a electronic circuit that turns off the juice when the voltage falls below 0.9 V? I would be happy to pay a few cents more to get such batteries.
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
Protection circuits protect the user from damage, not the battery. You can still damage protected cells.
 

45/70

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
2,800
Location
Rural Ohio
So, may be a protection circuit that protects the battery should be called shutdown circuit?

Usually that type of protection is built into the device itself, not the battery. I think "idiot proof" batteries would add a lot to the cost, as well. I'm not saying it's bad idea, just impractical.

Dave
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
It would also be a toy, not a tool. I will never carry a device as a tool that has the distinct chance of simply shutting off without warning.

Would you drive a car that simply turned off wherever it was at when the tank reached 1/8 fuel remaining? That would be a fun experence in rush hour traffic.
 

J_C

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
309
Some cars do shut down when critical sensor parameters are exceeded. The real issue is one of customer desire, people aren't very upset if a cheap NiMH cell dies like they'd be if their whole device went up in a Li-Ion fire, they just want a high capacity replacement for alkalines which also don't have a shutdown circuit.

I have to disagree about the toy vs tool thought though, for example I've seen many many cordless drills over the years that reverse charged / destroyed their NiCd cells because they didn't have a shutdown circuit and people kept using them past a safe discharge level. A tool vs a toy, should not be allowed to destroy any part of itself merely by holding in the on button.
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
Some cars do shut down when critical sensor parameters are exceeded. The real issue is one of customer desire, people aren't very upset if a cheap NiMH cell dies like they'd be if their whole device went up in a Li-Ion fire, they just want a high capacity replacement for alkalines which also don't have a shutdown circuit.

I have to disagree about the toy vs tool thought though, for example I've seen many many cordless drills over the years that reverse charged / destroyed their NiCd cells because they didn't have a shutdown circuit and people kept using them past a safe discharge level. A tool vs a toy, should not be allowed to destroy any part of itself merely by holding in the on button.

You obviously have never used a tool in a potentially life threatening situation, where it absolutely CANNOT simply "turn off" without warning, ie. NO "protection circuit".
 

J_C

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
309
You obviously have never used a tool in a potentially life threatening situation, where it absolutely CANNOT simply "turn off" without warning, ie. NO "protection circuit".

Is it any better if it fails because it killed the cells? Life threatening situation or not you want a quality *tool* not subject to failure which should include circuits that combat the common failure modes.

Then again, that's why a replaceable battery is so desirable. You can swap the cell and after all if the low voltage discharge were kicking in, at that point how useful is that device with it's drained battery? A few seconds of dim light if a flashlight? If it's that close a call a backup battery would be taken along.
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
A few seconds? Most moon modes last HOURS if not DAYS. Shutting off with absolutely no warning is perhaps the WORST thing a light can do.

Killing the cell (potentially, but unlikely) is far more desirable than killing the user IMO.

There are no production lights that I know of that will drain a NiMH cell so low that it will permanently damage it while providing no warning signs. Almost all Li-Ion lights will simply blink out without any warning unless you are running a single cell in a buck only light.
 
Last edited:

Illum

Flashaholic
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
13,053
Location
Central Florida, USA
Usually that type of protection is built into the device itself, not the battery. I think "idiot proof" batteries would add a lot to the cost, as well. I'm not saying it's bad idea, just impractical.

Dave

Given the limited volume of cells today, adding a protection circuit means reducing the volume of the actual cell to compensate for the circuit, a reduction of the volume means a reduction in capacity and perhaps a huge cost to halt a production line and re-spec everything.

Lithiums is a whole other story, and I'm pretty sure for LiMnO2 the PTC was in the design when it was first produced, and for LiCoO2 the "Protection circuit" was made relatively recently to encompass use in flashlights. typical LiCoO2 cells use array protection chips similar to what you see in laptops rather than for individual cells :)
 

J_C

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
309
A few seconds? Most moon modes last HOURS if not DAYS. Shutting off with absolutely no warning is perhaps the WORST thing a light can do.

No, a few seconds once the battery has drained till a shutdown circuit would've saved it, then it was damaged because there wasn't one. Moon mode on practically dead cells is not something realistic, if it's life or death that is too little light and once again no certainty when it would switch off, because remaining cell charge is very low by the time voltage starts plummeting towards a protective shutoff threshold.

Killing the cell (potentially, but unlikely) is far more desirable than killing the user IMO.
Ok, list all the people who wouldn't have survived, that you have any level of certainty wouldn't have because you would know when their light would have shut off, resulting in "killing the user". This is getting pretty far fetched, keeping in mind that a protection circuit would have prolonged cell life by preventing overdischarge on subsequent uses, there'd be more capacity to use. Further, many of us carry a 2nd light or at least backup cells if we're out and about where there isn't another option.

There are no production lights that I know of that will drain a NiMH cell so low that it will permanently damage it while providing no warning signs. Almost all Li-Ion lights will simply blink out without any warning unless you are running a single cell in a buck only light.
Describe these warning signs. You mean reduced output, like you'd see with any battery nearly drained? All it takes is more than one cell in series, with one either mismatched in charge or declining in true capacity relative to the other one.

I don't buy the life or death argument though, you're implying someone seriously considering such scenarios is going to put their life in the hands of a single AA flashlight. If that strategy works for you ok, but I'll stick with my preference that the device rather than the cell should shut down. This strategy hasn't harmed me or anyone else yet but I sure have seen a fair amount of cordless tools that destroyed their cells... this coming from someone who has been both in construction work and the military.
 
Last edited:

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
No, a few seconds once the battery has drained till a shutdown circuit would've saved it, then it was damaged because there wasn't one. Moon mode on practically dead cells is not something realistic, if it's life or death that is too little light and once again no certainty when it would switch off, because remaining cell charge is very low by the time voltage starts plummeting towards a protective shutoff threshold.

NiMH cells are not so fragile as the slightest over discharge kills them. If you believe so, I think we have found the reason you don't think overcharge kills them... You are blaming premature death on other (incorrect) reasons. If moon mode "only lasts a few seconds", the light does not have moon mode. Real moon modes last for HOURS. Often, when you NEED light, very little light will do just fine. Trust me, I test this hypothesis weekly...

Ok, list all the people who wouldn't have survived, that you have any level of certainty wouldn't have because you would know when their light would have shut off, resulting in "killing the user". This is getting pretty far fetched, keeping in mind that a protection circuit would have prolonged cell life by preventing overdischarge on subsequent uses, there'd be more capacity to use. Further, many of us carry a 2nd light or at least backup cells if we're out and about where there isn't another option.

On a nearly weekly basis I find myself in situations where a sudden shutoff without warning can be VERY dangerous, and everyone else in my group finds themselves in the same situation. It is the nature of caving. Sometimes a single missed step can be fatal, and you can be in places where you physically cannot reach any other light.


Describe these warning signs. You mean reduced output, like you'd see with any battery nearly drained? All it takes is more than one cell in series, with one either mismatched in charge or declining in true capacity relative to the other one.

Boost lights with protection circuits will show no warning signs. Without protection circuits, the light will dim near discharge, giving you ample time to adjust. I get the feeling you have never used a boost protected Li-Ion light.

I don't buy the life or death argument though, you're implying someone seriously considering such scenarios is going to put their life in the hands of a single AA flashlight. If that strategy works for you ok, but I'll stick with my preference that the device rather than the cell should shut down. This strategy hasn't harmed me or anyone else yet but I sure have seen a fair amount of cordless tools that destroyed their cells... this coming from someone who has been both in construction work and the military.

See above. Cordless tools are most often destroyed by improper charging practices than anything else. By far the most common cause of premature death is overcharge....

But if you actually served active duty, you should know that having front line equipment which is DESIGNED to cut off with absolutely ZERO warning is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. The same goes for law enforcement.

If you don't want to damage your cells, take them out when you notice dimming and recharge at the first available opportunity and you will avoid any damage. Frequent monitoring and top off charges (need that smart charger with the correct rate....) will avoid any damage from over discharge.

But overall, you totally miss the point that protection circuits are NOT designed to protect the equipment, but rather protect the user. If you are not using volitile chemistries (Li-Ion, LiPo, etc), they are unecessary.
 

J_C

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
309
NiMH cells are not so fragile as the slightest over discharge kills them. If you believe so, I think we have found the reason you don't think overcharge kills them... You are blaming premature death on other (incorrect) reasons. If moon mode "only lasts a few seconds", the light does not have moon mode.

I stated reverse charge, when there is more than one in series. If moon mode only lasts a few seconds it could be what I described, you are again ignoring simple facts like the one that we are discussing cells already drained so low that there is the discussion about whether a shutdown circuit would kick in, or perhaps you are assuming I meant a very high shutdown threshold without that being stated.

On a nearly weekly basis I find myself in situations where a sudden shutoff without warning can be VERY dangerous, and everyone else in my group finds themselves in the same situation. It is the nature of caving. Sometimes a single missed step can be fatal, and you can be in places where you physically cannot reach any other light.

Warning #1: Light output already dropped.

Warning #2: If you put a shutdown circuit in you can also put a low voltage warning indicator in IF it is that important to you, or of course carry extra cells, or of course know your equipment so you aren't wondering how much runtime you have remaining.

Then there's the issue of whether it is really reasonable to depend on a single AA NiMH light, which is what you seem to be implying you would depend on for caving. Is that really what you use, or are you just trying to argue?

Boost lights with protection circuits will show no warning signs. Without protection circuits, the light will dim near discharge, giving you ample time to adjust. I get the feeling you have never used a boost protected Li-Ion light.

Most boost circuits will drop in light output before you'd need to implement a shutdown circuit, we're not talking about the ideals of optimal voltage here, just to mitigate the chances of cell reversal, at a point where there was practically no runtime left. You want to argue the extra few moments matter but ultimately the light is running out of power either way, if you couldn't plan for it running out a few moments ago you're still in the same boat, and let's face it if you had some cricitical caving "step" you couldn't miss, then is not the time to find the light shut off from normal mode and you, as you imply, can't reach to switch it to moonlight mode, because of some strange impossible scenario.

Further, by the time the light has dropped enough that you would like to switch to moonlight mode, it probably won't even turn back on since turn-on voltage can be higher than that needed to keep running - when it didn't hence making you realize the cell voltage had dropped.

Or, if you did have an indication because it got dimmer then we are back to what I wrote above, you already knew your time was limited either way, either way you are stuck soon enough because you underestimated the needed runtime, but being practical I think either of us would have a spare light or at least cells to use.

See above. Cordless tools are most often destroyed by improper charging practices than anything else. By far the most common cause of premature death is overcharge....

This generalization you are making is not applicable to cordless tools nearly as much as some other lower current consumer gear. What ends up happening is the user tries to get that last screw driven, last hole drilled, last 2 x 4 cut, and puts massive current through a fully discharged cell. This is easily reproducible, take any typical NiCd or NiMH cordless drill and test it yourself.

By merely refraining from such cell abuse - no changes in charging, packs last quite a bit longer. This was plainly evident and shown true, I don't think you appreciate how much current goes through a stalled or nearly so DC tool motor.

But if you actually served active duty, you should know that having front line equipment which is DESIGNED to cut off with absolutely ZERO warning is COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE. The same goes for law enforcement.

You are responsible for your gear, you cannot just wonder if your flashlight has enough charge for your patrol, shift, etc., and cannot go without a backup pack or recharge means if it's possible continual runtime would require it. If you can't find a way to have any warning, then it sure seems like you above everyone else need to carry a second light.

Think about this another way. With your ideal, it is quite conceivable the light drains till by the time you realize you need to switch to moon mode, it is too late and the light can't switch off/on into moon mode because the cell voltage is now too low (if, again a situation I disagree with, you are depending on a single NiMH cell light for something important as a regular carry light source).

Now consider the opposite. If a protection circuit shuts it off, the slight voltage depression it had from running at a higher power output recovered for a moment and you are more likely able to put it in moon mode.

So basically, it could be the opposite of what you suggest. Without a shutdown circuit once the battery is drained low enough you would notice there is nothing you can do to keep it running, while with a shutdown circuit there is a posibility you can get more light by turning it back on in a lower mode.

If you don't want to damage your cells, take them out when you notice dimming and recharge at the first available opportunity and you will avoid any damage. Frequent monitoring and top off charges (need that smart charger with the correct rate....) will avoid any damage from over discharge.

Of course, but remember I was writing about more than one in series. With your idea of no protection, it may be too late to get more light OR avoid running one of them below 0V into reverse charge.

But overall, you totally miss the point that protection circuits are NOT designed to protect the equipment, but rather protect the user. If you are not using volitile chemistries (Li-Ion, LiPo, etc), they are unecessary.

I missed no point at all, you assumed I somehow *needed* to feel there is only one possible benefit to a protection circuit. As for unnecessary, that's a long twisted road to go down. I deem it unnecessary to go caving without any idea of your battery pack can run long enough, and unnecessary to try and decide for someone else what they should or shouldn't have in a flashlight they buy.

However, it indeed is not necessary, nor are a lot of things if taken one at a time and discounted without considering there was a reason someone else subjectively chose them.

And remember, initially I wrote tools, you wrote flashlights and went off on some very unlikely caving tangent, one with no real hope if it's that hairy because in moonlight mode we could play devil's advocate and suggest you'd fall on the next step anyway due to low light, if it's really so treacherous you can't even reach into a pack and get another battery.
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
I am now firmly convinced you don't have a solid grasp of how lights and protection circuits interact.

With multiple cells in series, as soon as the weakest cell drops low, the light WILL suddenly just shut off with ZERO warning if the cells are protected. If the cells are not protected, there will be a LONG decline in output, NOT seconds. You do not "switch it to moonlight mode", it is part of the circuit dropping out of regulation. No user interaction is required.

Low voltage indication built into the cell does not work. The only method they have to a power interrupt, which can permanently shut off the device if it uses an electronic switch, or will trigger mode changes if it has a mechanical switch. Both circumstances are highly undesirable IMO.

As to where to set the protection, it is a loose-loose situation. You either set it too high and you loose significant portions of usable capacity, AND the light will show NO signs of dimming prior to cutoff, or you set it too low and it never even triggers before the cell naturally cannot support the current draw and visually dim, so all you gain is lost capacity of the cell, and a parasitic drain in storage.

If you are running multiple cells in series and one is significantly mismatched enough to reverse charge and the others are able to support the current draw without visible signs of dimming, you are not properly maintaining your cells to begin with, so you have other (much larger) problems with your rechargable regime.

It is also abundantly clear you have never used a light in critical circumstances, and can only pretend to understand.
 

Isthereanybodyoutthere

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
170
I have a simple light from DX
i use protected 18650 ,if i run the light long enough at HIGH ,it suddenly shuts of
if i am smart enough ,i will click/shut of the light
after a few seconds the protection is reset
i can now turn on the light again ,if i do it at HIGH ,it will shut of again
if i am smart enough ,i will NOT turn it on at HIGH again
:thinking: i will turn it on at LOW ,and it will run for a hour
SO i DID get my warning
AND i did have backup light

And its simple to understand why it works so fine :naughty::popcorn:
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL

Linger

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
1,437
Location
Kingston ON
This is all friendly, right?:D
In the beginning this wasn't about an person, but a nimh battery.
Sometimes making attributions about another person prompts them to respond defensively.
 
Last edited:

J_C

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
309
I am now firmly convinced you don't have a solid grasp of how lights and protection circuits interact.

I'm quite aware, but you're not realizing a circuit for a different purpose and/or different cell need not be exactly the same.

With multiple cells in series, as soon as the weakest cell drops low, the light WILL suddenly just shut off with ZERO warning if the cells are protected. If the cells are not protected, there will be a LONG decline in output, NOT seconds. You do not "switch it to moonlight mode", it is part of the circuit dropping out of regulation. No user interaction is required.

True, agreed, etc, except no there may not be a long decline when you were speaking of 1 x AA NiMH, because at the point of shutdown it's not near the LED Vf, it's barely having any capacity left at all before it's below the Vf of the boost driver. You're trying to apply the properties of Li-Ion use to a light powered by NiMH. Anyone can look at a NiMH graph and clearly see there's precious little time remaining once the cell gets below a certain threshold before there's too little forward voltage to power the light at all without a protection circuit, too.

In the case of multiple cells, one could dip too low and the other not far behind, still you have very little time left assuming you haven't done something contraindicated like charge up one but not the other.

Low voltage indication built into the cell does not work.

Well it could, but I was referring to a low voltage indicator on the light itself - for those who subscribe to your idea that there is some ultimate moment of life and death when you take the next step. Fortunately, most of us stop stepping if our light goes out and have seen it before so we know how to change the battery in the dark, but also recall what I wrote previously, it could easily be that with no shutoff circuit you are left with no way to turn the light back on for candle mode while with a shutoff circuit enough capacity remains that after a moment of rest and recovery the light could turn back on.

It's beside the point though, I advocate not getting oneself into situations where they MUST have light but cannot manage to change a battery nor keep track of how much capacity is remaining.

The only method they have to a power interrupt, which can permanently shut off the device if it uses an electronic switch, or will trigger mode changes if it has a mechanical switch. Both circumstances are highly undesirable IMO.

You're entitled to that opinion, but it does not begin to cover all tools nor every flashlight scenario which was your initial implication.

As to where to set the protection, it is a loose-loose situation. You either set it too high and you loose significant portions of usable capacity, AND the light will show NO signs of dimming prior to cutoff, or you set it too low and it never even triggers before the cell naturally cannot support the current draw and visually dim, so all you gain is lost capacity of the cell, and a parasitic drain in storage.

False. Think about it. What is the other option besides setting it too high or setting it too low?

Regardless, let's suppose we set it lower than you think it would need be, whatever that could mean since you are against such a circuit. It doesn't necessarily need to trigger before the cell can't support the current, it only needs to not continually subject the cell to reverse charging. However, I was never necessarily referring only to a per-cell circuit as the OP was, I would as soon have it built into the device electronics. It would not then indicate individual cells of course, but it comes back to the same central issue that whatever battery you use you have to pick it and know what it's runtime is for these supposed life or death scenarios, or is that crucial death-step in the cave right at the entrance so you need not have any more runtime after that step?

All a protection circuit needs do is shut down at the last moment before a cell sits there and reverse charges. It's not a terribly hard thing to do, note that devices like cameras can and often do shut off when battery voltage goes too low.

If you are running multiple cells in series and one is significantly mismatched enough to reverse charge and the others are able to support the current draw without visible signs of dimming, you are not properly maintaining your cells to begin with, so you have other (much larger) problems with your rechargable regime.

Ah, but I don't NEED to make it a religion when there is automation, like cutoff circuits, and yet you overlook what was already mentioned that if you are subject to running down the cells to the point one would be reverse charging it is not I that has a "use issue".

It is also abundantly clear you have never used a light in critical circumstances, and can only pretend to understand.

It is abundantly clear that you terribly dislike when someone has a different perspective that works fine for them. I don't have to pretend that I wouldn't put myself in a situation where I had no idea if my light had enough capacity nor did I have a backup. In a cave, especially, no way!

Go ahead and run your tools down to the very last drop of power and who are you going to blame when you reverse charge a cell, or do you not accept this is not only possible but will happen? This is an easily reproducible situation with any series pack that has no form of shutdown circuit. It is clearly true that reverse charging does damage cells.

How about the sane middle ground? There are both Li-Ion cells with and without protection, why could there not be devices that do and don't have safety shutdown? I have never argued that ALL MUST have it, but from failures I have seen and confirmed as to cause it would have clearly been of benefit.

... and with that, I have concluded my interest in this topic.
 

Marduke

Flashaholic
Joined
Jun 19, 2007
Messages
10,110
Location
Huntsville, AL
True, agreed, etc, except no there may not be a long decline when you were speaking of 1 x AA NiMH, because at the point of shutdown it's not near the LED Vf, it's barely having any capacity left at all before it's below the Vf of the boost driver. You're trying to apply the properties of Li-Ion use to a light powered by NiMH. Anyone can look at a NiMH graph and clearly see there's precious little time remaining once the cell gets below a certain threshold before there's too little forward voltage to power the light at all without a protection circuit, too.

Have you ever owned a 1x cell regulated light? Take the E01 for example. It will fall out of regulation ~0.9v, but will continue to operate for around another DAY, down to 0.4v. How a light operates depends entirely on the specific circuit used, but the VAST majority will operate for many hours AFTER regulation. Vf of regulation != Vf of the circuit in most cases.
 

baterija

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
1,053
Let's look at a comparison of the cost and benefits of adding it in.

Benefits:
- Prevent overdischarge damaging a cell worth maybe $2-3.

...umm maybe I should have said benefit. ;)

Costs:
- Obviously the cost of the circuit and extra assembly is a real dollar cost.
- Reduced cell capacity.
- At least for one person here, sudden off being unacceptable.
- Physical damage to the protection circuit can lead to shorting (it has a current path from cathode to anode beneath the label.) So increased chance of short when carried in a manner where it's exposed to physical damage.
- Parasitic drain associated with the protection circuit. Our LSD cells suddenly have a slightly higher discharge rate.

It's basically the same cost benefit analysis as for the Li-ion with one key difference. With Li-ion you reduce the risk of serious fire causing property damage or injury. NiMh doesn't have that risk associated though.

In effect you are asking why don't we pay more for less (Capacity) simply so that cell lives longer when mistreated. I'm not seeing a return on investment here. In my view the costs of the protection circuit outweigh the benefits even if the price per cell was the same.
 
Top