I have attached a simplified schematic of the equaliser to help explain how it works.
S1, S2 & S3 are static cells wired in series.
F1 & F2 are flying cells.
Q1 – Q8 are MOSFET’s.
The MOSFET’s are switched in pairs. Q1 & Q3, Q2 & Q4. (Q1 & Q5 are P type)
The top 14047 controls Q1, Q2, Q3 & Q4.
So, if Q1 & Q3 are ON then F1 is in parallel with S1. If S1 has more charge than F1 then current will flow from S1 into F1. Alternatively if F1 has more charge than S1 then current will flow from F1 into S1.
When Q2 & Q4 are ON then F1 is in parallel with S2. If S2 has more charge than F1 then current will flow from S2 into F1. Alternatively if F1 has more charge than S2 then current will flow from F1 into S2.
The bottom 14047 controls Q5, Q6, Q7 & Q8.
The basic action is as above so charge is distributed S2 S3 & F2. Also, because the two 14047 are not synchronised there will be occasions when F2 is in parallel with S2 and F1.
If we start with S1 charged and S2, S3, F1 & F2 discharged then eventually the charge from S1 will be evenly distributed between all 5 cells.
The flying cells are switched at about 1Hz and the switch transition time is nanoseconds therefore the flying cells can be considered to be in time division parallel with the static cells. The ‘OFF’ time is a tiny fraction of the ‘ON’ time.
Conceptually, we have 8 static cells in parallel with 7 flying cells. Taking this one step further an individual electron may consider the cells to be in series and in parallel at the same time. This takes a bit of thinking about.
The flying cell equaliser works if the series resistance through the MOSFET’s and wiring is kept to a few milli Ohms. The suggestion by Rerouter to use a mux with series resistance of 125 Ohm is orders of magnitude too high. There will simply not be sufficient energy passed on each cycle to be useful.
As for the cell degradation theory I have seen no published data to support this. Perhaps Rerouter can advise where his information comes from?