The Cyber-Spy.Com Usenet Archive Feeds Directly
From The Open And Publicly Available Newsgroup
This Group And Thousands Of Others Are Available
On Most IS NNTP News Servers On Port 119.
Cyber-Spy.Com Is NOT Responsible For Any Topic,
Opinions Or Content Posted To This Or Any Other
Newsgroup. This Web Archive Of The Newsgroup And
Posts Are For Informational Purposes Only.
From: "Phil Allison"
References: <0001HW.B9D43FDF0325BBB11662EAD0@news.covad.net> <0001HW.B9D4EE870344BA681662EAD0@news.covad.net> <3DB01FBB.EAF744F9@usa.net> <0001HW.B9D572FB034E39101662EAD0@news.covad.net> <3DB02E27.firstname.lastname@example.org> <3DB2A987.FA0DD93E@usa.net>
Subject: Re: Difference between AC adapter and charger?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:36:37 +1000
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 17:27:55 EST
Organization: Telstra BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.com)
"Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
> In article ,
> email@example.com says...
> > "Keith R. Williams" wrote in message
> > news:MPG.firstname.lastname@example.org...
> > > That part works too. The "memory effect" hasn't been seen for
> > > twenty years. The "memory effect", or more properly "voltage
> > > depression" issues were solved back in the early 80s.
> > ** You have been contrdicted on this point countless times - are
> > nut ??
> NO, I dare say that anyone who posts as you do is, err, "challenged".
** You have been many times corrected on this mistake - put up or
> > > *NEVER* drain a multi-cell NiCd pack to zero! To equalize cells
> > > charge them fully, perhaps a bit of an over-charge. Cheap NiCd
> > > chargers bake the living daylights out of the poor things.
> > ** Some do some don't.
> ALL DO! You're simply wrong (or stupid).
** You are an absolute pig - and a liar.
> > > Intermediate chargers look for the negative dV/dt, which isn't
> > > fool proof. Good chargers monitor the cell temperature to shift
> > > from charge to float (or better - off).
> > **That is far from foolproof too.
> Not foolproof, no, but it's hard to bake a battery when it's not
> being charged, now isn't it. The biggest failure mechanism of
> NiCds is reverse charge, followed by baking the poor bastards in
> a constant charge (even 1/20C will kill the things).
** All drivel - you do not have a point and you do not get mine.
> > > This has *nothing* to do with the so-called "memory" effect
> > > though. This effect does *not* exist in modern cells to any
> > > detectable extent. Most people blame the "memory effect" for
> > > packs that were ruined by reverse charged cells.
> > ** Add to that overcharged cells that lose their water, high
> > discharge cells that never come up to the charge in a pack and shorted
> > due to long storagae and old age.
> NiCds lose their water? Now you're stretching things a bit.
> Where did you get your degree?
** Every Ni-Cd cell contains a small amount of water - if that
is lost through evaporation the capacity is gone. Didn't you know that ??
> Perhaps you should enlist in a remedial reading program before
> you try electronics again.
** You are one arrogant turd.
.... . . .. . ............... Phil
Go Back To The Cyber-Spy.Com
Usenet Web Archive Index Of
The sci.electronics.design Newsgroup