lidl rechargeable batteries

[Ian Smith]

Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this
might help:

I've had two packs (eight AA cells) in intermittent general use for
about the last year. They've been in GPS, CD player, tape player,
digital camera. They've only ever been on -ve delta-V terminated
chargers, which monitor the cells individually (ie, never been
abused). I've recently individually put seven of them through an
analyser cycle (I can't find the eighth).

They claim to be 2100mAh.

I've put them on a machine which charges fully (500mA to a 4mV -ve
delta-V, then a top-off at 100mA), waits 10 minutes then discharges at
500mA to 0.8V, waits ten minutes then repeats the cycle twice. I then
average the discharge capacity from the three cycles. So, that's a
moderate load current, but nothing too extreme, to quite a low voltage
(in a battery, I generally aim to stop at 0.9V per cell).

My seven cells have capacity (rounding to nearest 10mAh)
1200
1240
1380
1410
1450
1450
1620

This is less than I like - I reckon a cell should give at least 80% of
what it claims, and the Lidl cells are typically only two thirds what
they claim. (They are lower performance than the last non-Lidl
nominal 1800mAH cells I bought, for example, which turned out to be
generally 1450-1650 ish.) However, with that caveat in mind, for
1200-1400mAh cells they are probably not too bad a price.

I have not experimented with what their peak current capability is -
if I want high current I generally use sub-C cells anyway. Likewise,
I've not investigated the rate of self-discharge.

The other caveat is that there's something funny about these cells
when they are new - my decent charger won't charge them until my other
(cheaper, less sensitive, less interesting) charger has charged them a
few cycles.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

[Martin Bulmer]

Ian Smith wrote:
> Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
> question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this
> might help:
>
> I've had two packs (eight AA cells) in intermittent general use for
> about the last year. They've been in GPS, CD player, tape player,
> digital camera. They've only ever been on -ve delta-V terminated
> chargers, which monitor the cells individually (ie, never been
> abused). I've recently individually put seven of them through an
> analyser cycle (I can't find the eighth).
>
> They claim to be 2100mAh.
>
> I've put them on a machine which charges fully (500mA to a 4mV -ve
> delta-V, then a top-off at 100mA), waits 10 minutes then discharges at
> 500mA to 0.8V, waits ten minutes then repeats the cycle twice. I then
> average the discharge capacity from the three cycles. So, that's a
> moderate load current, but nothing too extreme, to quite a low voltage
> (in a battery, I generally aim to stop at 0.9V per cell).
>
> My seven cells have capacity (rounding to nearest 10mAh)
> 1200
> 1240
> 1380
> 1410
> 1450
> 1450
> 1620
>
> This is less than I like - I reckon a cell should give at least 80% of
> what it claims, and the Lidl cells are typically only two thirds what
> they claim. (They are lower performance than the last non-Lidl
> nominal 1800mAH cells I bought, for example, which turned out to be
> generally 1450-1650 ish.) However, with that caveat in mind, for
> 1200-1400mAh cells they are probably not too bad a price.
>
> I have not experimented with what their peak current capability is -
> if I want high current I generally use sub-C cells anyway. Likewise,
> I've not investigated the rate of self-discharge.
>
> The other caveat is that there's something funny about these cells
> when they are new - my decent charger won't charge them until my other
> (cheaper, less sensitive, less interesting) charger has charged them a
> few cycles.
>
> regards, Ian SMith

This is the kind of spare time I would like to have. I'd have preferred it
unrounded; accuracy is everything.
--


Martin Bulmer

[Peter Fox[_2_]]

Ian Smith wrote:
> Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
> question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this

Get 4 new ones, keep the receipt and do the test on the new ones. The capacity of
batteries depends on the discharge rate (See Wikepedia) but a 4 hour discharge sounds
reasonable to me for 2 AAs and a cycle light. Then publish the results here and write to
Which?

It amazes me, but why am I not surprised, that batteries aren't required to have
best-before-dates and Ah on the packet. Guess who does the lobbying against, and how
their money compares to the lines of the unwashed, unimportant like us.


--
Peter Fox
Beer, dancing, cycling and lots more at www.eminent.demon.co.uk

[Rob Morley]

In article >, Martin Bulmer
says...

> This is the kind of spare time I would like to have. I'd have preferred it
> unrounded; accuracy is everything.
>
Hint: precision is not the same as accuracy.

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, Peter Fox > wrote:

> Ian Smith wrote:
> > Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
> > question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this
>
> Get 4 new ones, keep the receipt and do the test on the new ones.
> The capacity of batteries depends on the discharge rate (See
> Wikepedia) but a 4 hour discharge sounds reasonable to me for 2 AAs
> and a cycle light. Then publish the results here and write to
> Which?

CBA.

Besides which, they may well meet spec - if you discharge at 1%C
(21mA) to 0.1V you might get the quoted 2100mAh in 5% of the cells.
The manufacturer could easily claim that was the specification he was
working to, and it would take two weeks per cell to do the test.

The purpose was only to quantify (and disseminate) how good or bad the
cells were, on the vague off-chance that anyone was interested (I
periodically test all my cells anyway - with the analyser it's no more
work than putting them on to charge, despite aspersions elsewhere in
the thread).

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

[Pete Biggs]

Ian Smith wrote:
........
> The purpose was only to quantify (and disseminate) how good or bad the
> cells were, on the vague off-chance that anyone was interested (I
> periodically test all my cells anyway - with the analyser it's no more
> work than putting them on to charge, despite aspersions elsewhere in
> the thread).

I'm interested; thanks for posting.

I'd also be interested in any tests of other brands, particularly of any of
the "2700 mAh" (or similiar) AAs sold cheaply on eBay.

~PB

[James Weston]

Ian Smith wrote:
> Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
> question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this
> might help:
>
> I've had two packs (eight AA cells) in intermittent general use for
> about the last year. They've been in GPS, CD player, tape player,
> digital camera. They've only ever been on -ve delta-V terminated
> chargers, which monitor the cells individually (ie, never been
> abused). I've recently individually put seven of them through an
> analyser cycle (I can't find the eighth).
>
> They claim to be 2100mAh.
>
> I've put them on a machine which charges fully (500mA to a 4mV -ve
> delta-V, then a top-off at 100mA), waits 10 minutes then discharges at
> 500mA to 0.8V, waits ten minutes then repeats the cycle twice. I then
> average the discharge capacity from the three cycles. So, that's a
> moderate load current, but nothing too extreme, to quite a low voltage
> (in a battery, I generally aim to stop at 0.9V per cell).
>
> My seven cells have capacity (rounding to nearest 10mAh)
> 1200
> 1240
> 1380
> 1410
> 1450
> 1450
> 1620
>
> This is less than I like - I reckon a cell should give at least 80% of
> what it claims, and the Lidl cells are typically only two thirds what
> they claim. (They are lower performance than the last non-Lidl
> nominal 1800mAH cells I bought, for example, which turned out to be
> generally 1450-1650 ish.) However, with that caveat in mind, for
> 1200-1400mAh cells they are probably not too bad a price.
>
> I have not experimented with what their peak current capability is -
> if I want high current I generally use sub-C cells anyway. Likewise,
> I've not investigated the rate of self-discharge.
>
> The other caveat is that there's something funny about these cells
> when they are new - my decent charger won't charge them until my other
> (cheaper, less sensitive, less interesting) charger has charged them a
> few cycles.
>
> regards, Ian SMith

Thanks for the interesting information.

James

[Adrian Godwin]

I've got some of the 7-day-shop own-brand 2800mAh cells at the
moment and they seem to be pretty reasonable, at least for the
relatively short period I've been using them. Twice the price
of the Lidl ones, but still seem cheap at 3.99. Plus postage.

I don't have any proper capacity measurements, though.

-adrian

[Barb]

Interesting post, particularly since I'm just about to buy some 2500+
rechargeables for my mp3 and PDA battery packs.

There are some incredibly cheap ones on Ebay, but I think, in the end, you
get what you pay for ... However, shopping around on the net can reduce
the prices of the top brands by as much as half.

As far as using them in my bike lights - which I did last winter - when I
got to work I always took off my lights and kept them in the warm in the
office. I'm sure this helps.

Barb



"Adrian Godwin" > wrote in message
...
> I've got some of the 7-day-shop own-brand 2800mAh cells at the
> moment and they seem to be pretty reasonable, at least for the
> relatively short period I've been using them. Twice the price
> of the Lidl ones, but still seem cheap at 3.99. Plus postage.
>
> I don't have any proper capacity measurements, though.
>
> -adrian

[_[_2_]]

On 11 Sep 2007 19:33:31 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

> Lidl have their rechargeable batteries coming up again soon, and the
> question "how good are they" has arisen in the past. Possibly this
> might help:
>
> I've had two packs (eight AA cells) in intermittent general use for
> about the last year. They've been in GPS, CD player, tape player,
> digital camera. They've only ever been on -ve delta-V terminated
> chargers, which monitor the cells individually (ie, never been
> abused). I've recently individually put seven of them through an
> analyser cycle (I can't find the eighth).
>
> They claim to be 2100mAh.
>
> I've put them on a machine which charges fully (500mA to a 4mV -ve
> delta-V, then a top-off at 100mA), waits 10 minutes then discharges at
> 500mA to 0.8V, waits ten minutes then repeats the cycle twice. I then
> average the discharge capacity from the three cycles. So, that's a
> moderate load current, but nothing too extreme, to quite a low voltage
> (in a battery, I generally aim to stop at 0.9V per cell).
>

More details on this machine, please.

[Tim Hall]

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:10:38 +0100, "Pete Biggs"
> wrote:

>Ian Smith wrote:
>.......
>> The purpose was only to quantify (and disseminate) how good or bad the
>> cells were, on the vague off-chance that anyone was interested (I
>> periodically test all my cells anyway - with the analyser it's no more
>> work than putting them on to charge, despite aspersions elsewhere in
>> the thread).
>
>I'm interested; thanks for posting.
>
>I'd also be interested in any tests of other brands, particularly of any of
>the "2700 mAh" (or similiar) AAs sold cheaply on eBay.
>

One of my cycling comics, Arrivee I think, had a run time test of
misc. NiMh cells a few months back.

The winner was 7dayshop.com, 2400mAh version.

Tim

[Ian Smith]

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007, _ <> wrote:
> On 11 Sep 2007 19:33:31 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:
>
> > I've put them on a machine which charges fully (500mA to a 4mV -ve
> > delta-V, then a top-off at 100mA), waits 10 minutes then discharges at
> > 500mA to 0.8V, waits ten minutes then repeats the cycle twice. I then
> > average the discharge capacity from the three cycles. So, that's a
> > moderate load current, but nothing too extreme, to quite a low voltage
> > (in a battery, I generally aim to stop at 0.9V per cell).
>
> More details on this machine, please.

It's a battery charger as sold to electric RC types. Personally, I
use a Triton. http://www.electrifly.com/chargers/gpmm3153.html has
the latest model.

Mine does 1-24 NimH or NiCd cells, 1-4 Lithium cells, 3/6/12 lead-acid
cells, adjustable up to 5A charge, adjustable up to 3A discharge,
various charge termination criteria, various programs, up to 10 cycles
of any program.

Triton very cheap for the spec when it first came out. The
switches are a bit flaky / tacky and I note that the latest version
they've uprated them.

A little upmarket from the Triton is the Robbe Infinity 2, and better
still the Infinity 3 (http://www.robbe.de but you're on your own from
there on because their web site is hard work). This is what I wanted,
but at the time of purchase budget didn't stretch to it. The Infinity
2 and 3 can do 30 cells, at higher currents. (The second output, btw,
is a waste of space - it's equivalent to a 4 quid wall-wart.) If I
were buying now, I'd probably buy an Infinity 3.

All the above run off a 12V DV supply, but it needs a decent current -
these chargers will step up the voltage if required, so are pulling
higher than charge currents from the supply. I use a home-modified
surplus PC supply (you need to provide a power-good signal back to the
supply, and draw a decent current from the 5V lines to get the 12V
stable on a PC switched-mode supply).

http://www.rcbatteryclinic.com/ has some good stuff about this sort
of charger, and has reviews of the Triton and the Infinity 2, though
in both cases older than current models.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

[Jonathan Schneider]

"mb" > writes:

> Personal experience tells me that GP are the best. Uniross and Ansmann
> are best left in the shop and "own brand" batteries are to be avoided.

Though I have a pair of GP 1300mAh that seem to have a lower capacity
than my old Uniross 800mAh NiCds. Also a bit shorter than everything
else so they don't contact reliably.

Jon