EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)

[EEVblog]

They claim in a recent article that they tested it in a GPS thingo and got 5 times the battery life.
Ok, great, why can't they just show this, use that as their big demo and then claim "up to 5 times"?
Instead they have to put on this bullshit dog and pony show that is flat out lies, deception, and demonstrable stupidity 
People would still buy their product if they were just honest about the whole thing.
They still haven't released any data they said was their "top priority", and of course, they won't, ever.

[Muttley Snickers]

I've been busy...

Wytnucls just posted on another thread that they may release a version for rechargeables.

[amyk]

They claim in a recent article that they tested it in a GPS thingo and got 5 times the battery life.

Of all the devices they could've cherry-picked, they picked one that's almost certain to have a boost converter already built in...

[EEVblog]

Of all the devices they could've cherry-picked, they picked one that's almost certain to have a boost converter already built in...

The only evidence they have ever presented is the video on the (non DC-DC converter) torch light meter test.
Of course, modern torches have DC-DC converters for a reason 

[rollatorwieltje]

Was reading the comments on IGG, so they're rolling their own IC? Wow.

[HKJ]

The only evidence they have ever presented is the video on the (non DC-DC converter) torch light meter test.
Of course, modern torches have DC-DC converters for a reason 

Yes, it is a bit problematic to run a led on 1.5V, but the drivers do not always try to get constant brightness (It is usual a bad idea on a single cell).
Lights with more batteries may go for constant brights or with timed dimming.

[Galenbo]

I wonder: At what point would people actually stop and think?

"Up to 100x longer battery life!"

Something that came to my mind too.

Let's overdo them. Let's make a video claiming that batteriseroo's technology is dated, and claim we have a "much thinner stronger better" case that gives "up to xxx" times more energy, in "significantly more" devices.

I carry 5000 patents.

[Fungus]

The first fan video (nature man) was submitted before they explained on youtube and google+ how and where to submit them.

And you know that ... how?

[EEVblog]

Impromptu 30min rant on the Batteriser here:

[Kjelt]

Google ads is too intelligent 

[EEVblog]

Google ads is too intelligent 

I've seen it on ebay too, they are everywhere.
It's funny how they have to raise $30K on crowd funding site but have endless money for adsense ads, slick marketing campaigns with professionally shot videos etc.

[Fungus]

Impromptu 30min rant on the Batteriser here:

The best batteriser video yet!

PS: But I don't the product is fine, bullshit marketing or otherwise. I'm fairly sure that most products will get less battery life with a Batteriser than without. Plus it stops your battery-life indicator from working, and you risk battery damage and data loss in products like cameras which check the battery voltage before writing to SD cards.

[Fungus]

Dave II's mum used to check battery voltages??   

THAT's a mum!

[Fungus]

If you want to do another video you should simulate a Batteriser using a DC boost converter. I don't know if there's an off-the-shelf one with those voltages (single AA battery in, 1.5V out).

With one of those you can log the power curves for different modes (constant power, constant current) and see how battery lifetimes compare to just using the batteries on their own.

For constant power you'd have to feed into a second boost converter to make it realistic.

Log the total power use, show the boost-converter efficiency, draw conclusions.

If you can't find an off the self converter for 1.1 to 1.5V you could put three batteries in series and use a common-as-muck 5V booster. If you get one of the newer "PFM" converters they're usually close to 90% efficient - most likely much better than the batteriser can manage with its tiny inductor. Would people accept that? EEVBLOG viewers know it's equivalent, but...

[McBryce]

Or just wait till they are released and do a few real-world tests with the actual product.

McBryce.

[Fungus]

Or just wait till they are released and do a few real-world tests with the actual product.

The delivery time is October. That's far too late.

There's still time to get their crowdfunding cancelled... it's not over yet. Indiegogo's terms of use prohibit scam products or products that "claim to do the impossible".

The claims being made on the crowdfunding front page are clearly impossible.

[EEVblog]

PS: But I don't the product is fine, bullshit marketing or otherwise. I'm fairly sure that most products will get less battery life with a Batteriser than without. Plus it stops your battery-life indicator from working, and you risk battery damage and data loss in products like cameras which check the battery voltage before writing to SD cards.

Sure, but I still think it could be a good product in several (but minority of) circumstances.

[Fungus]

Sure, but I still think it could be a good product in several (but minority of) circumstances.

I think the only example we've found so far is "Olympus Cameras".

[Galenbo]

Indiegogo's terms of use prohibit scam products or products that "claim to do the impossible".

What if "some website" puts some text online, naming it "our own terms of use" and does nothing with it?
Are they held responsible in court, and have to pay back everyone, because they didn't investigate and delete it?

Or is that just part of the whole marketing scam?

[EEVblog]

If you can't find an off the self converter for 1.1 to 1.5V you could put three batteries in series and use a common-as-muck 5V booster. If you get one of the newer "PFM" converters they're usually close to 90% efficient - most likely much better than the batteriser can manage with its tiny inductor. Would people accept that? EEVBLOG viewers know it's equivalent, but...

Yes, it's got to be using PFM of some description, otherwise the efficiency response will be horrible. And yes, I don't see how the required ultra tiny inductor can be doing it nay favors at all, I expect a fair bit of droopy somewhere. But that remains to be seen.
Why wouldn't they be boasting to the hilt if it was super efficient across the entire current range?
I don't understand how you can spend 5 years developing this, do a custom ASIC converter, and not publish an efficiency curve for it?

[Fungus]

Are they held responsible in court, and have to pay back everyone, because they didn't investigate and delete it?

I don't know but I'm betting it's a lot harder to do anything after the campaign is over and the funds released.

I wrote to Indiegogo and got this reply:

Hi there,

Thank you for sharing your concern with us. At this time, the campaign is under review to ensure that it adheres to our Terms of Use (http://www.indiegogo.com/about/terms). We will follow up with you if we have any further questions.

So what happens now? We will include the information you have provided along with all other information at our disposal in our review of the campaign. In some cases, we will contact the campaign owner to have them edit their campaign and it will remain on our platform. If the project doesn't follow our rules, we may remove the campaign. We may also restrict the campaign owner's future activities on Indiegogo.

I'm not sure how "editing the campaign" helps people who already signed up for a product but it's clear that campaigns can be cancelled.

[Fungus]

I don't understand how you can spend 5 years developing this, do a custom ASIC converter, and not publish an efficiency curve for it?

There's only one plausible answer: "People would point at it and laugh!"

[apis]

Luckily I had it screen captured:

Everyone should keep reposting this everywhere!
It blows their claim completely out of the water, and it's why they had to change the wording in their promo video too, their logo etc.
They know that once they admitted that it's trivial for anyone to look a battery datasheet and see how much energy is really wasted in the battery at the 1.1V cutoff they have admitted. That puts their product, buy their own admission!, in the territory of only applying to a smaller number of badly designed products. No wonder they removed it.

The only thing they had left to defend themselves was the ridiculous and embarrassing claim that I did the testing wrong.
I'm in two minds whether to do another video busting absolutely everything they have done and have said, and changed etc. But I know it won't amount to a hill of beans.
Should I bother?

Might be a good idea to update the "the batteriser explained" page with that admission!

I suspect you have said all that can be said to convince those who can be convinced. Do another video if it's fun, but just don't expect them to admit they were wrong (well, any more than they already have!)

[apis]

Sure, but I still think it could be a good product in several (but minority of) circumstances.

I think the only example we've found so far is "Olympus Cameras".

And that cheap flashlight they showed perhaps (if you prefer constant light flux over battery-life), but why not spend the money for a batteriser on a better flashlight instead. (I would bet they got the flashlight idea from the eevblog forum as well.)

[firewalker]

They change it again!

Alexander.