EEVblog > EEVblog Specific
EEVblog #751 - How To Debunk A Product (The Batteriser)
<< < (18/1798) > >>
Wytnucls:

--- Quote from: 0xdeadbeef on June 06, 2015, 10:35:14 am ---
--- Quote from: Wytnucls on June 06, 2015, 10:19:40 am ---The 800% battery life increase may even be true in some extreme case.
--- End quote ---
As mentioned before, an increase by 800% would mean that only about 11% of the capacity would be used under normal conditions. Not taking into account efficiency etc. I guess it will be extremely difficult to find one case where this is the case.

--- End quote ---

They only need one instance to make the statement true. Totally misleading, but we wouldn't be talking about their gizmo if they had only claimed an average of 20% increase. So the advertising fib paid off.
amyk:

--- Quote from: LaurenceW on June 05, 2015, 11:50:56 pm ---Battery life on just about all moderm electronics products is their achilles' heel. To gain commercial advantage, manufacturers will pull every trick in the book to make THEIR gizmo last longer than a competitor's, by better battery management and, where applicable, buck/boost converters in their power conditioning circuits.

So IF some external electronic snake-oil was going to have ANY effect on product longevity (on one set of batteries), don't you think that the manufacturers would have already built the same technology into their products, for the competitive edge it would give them? Only they don't do it, because it doesn't work (for 90% of all devices).
--- End quote ---
This, exactly. What's stopping designers from putting boost converters in?

In fact, most devices with electronics either will cut out completely around 0.7-0.8V anyway, or already have boost converters to generate the right voltages. Adding another boost step just lowers the overall efficiency so that extra bit of energy at the end might not ever be used to do useful work.

The "80 percent of the energy that is usually thrown away" quote might even be referring to their ultraminiature boost converter having only 80% efficiency...  which is not that great.
max_torque:
What do we know:

1) on "average" based on testing a (fairly common, and random) selection of battery powered devices, Dave showed that most run down to around 1v, before cutting out.

2) for an "average" battery, the 1V point is approximately 80% discharged typically, leaving another 20% of energy unusable.


3) A 100% efficient DC/DC convertor could leverage that extra 20% energy and make it available to the load.

4) No DC/DC convertor is 100% efficient, and their operating efficiency is HIGHLY dependent upon the load placed across them.

5) On average, typical existing DC/DC convertors would be expected to be between 90 & 95% efficient. meaning the extra energy available to an average load can be expected to be between 10 and 15%



Now, you'll note the use of "on average" as this is the important bit!  What matters is the average useage of this device not the extreme ends of the normal distribution curve!
It's like claiming your car does INFINITE miles per gallon because you have rolled down a hill with the engine off, and conveniently forgetting to mention how it got to the top of the hill, or that most people don't only drive downhill etc

So if we ignore all the marketing Bull, this product does potentially have some uses.  For example, you're giving a presentation and the battery in your wireless mouse goes "flat".  You whip out a Batteriser, and you're able to finish your presentation.  That's a genuinely usefull scenario.

 However, you could also finish that presentation by simply keeping a spare battery in your bag, which would fit any device, and provide 100% more run time, not 10%........


If this device is well designed, cheap, and they actually claim some realistic performance claims (which will be easily testable!) then it has a good future imo, but the blatant marketing spin and frankly, downright lies, published to date do nothing to help their case!
mzacharias:
The battery drop-out voltage on my Fluke 27II was 1.4 volts per cell. And when it drops out, it REALLY drops out. You have to remove the batteries and replace them before the meter will turn on again.
max_torque:

--- Quote from: Wytnucls on June 06, 2015, 11:41:08 am ---
They only need one instance to make the statement true.

--- End quote ---


Sorry, but no we don't.  They use words like "most" or "majority" or "typically"  to refer to the proportion of devices that only discharge their power source to 1.4V, any of which wording would not stand up in a court of law.   Technically speaking, to have a majority, you need over 50% of devices to cut out at 1.4V to support their claims.

If they had said "some" or "occasionally" then they would have a case.


For example, history shows it is possible to be shot in the head by a bullet and survive, for example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2030646/Man-survives-bullet-brain-30-YEARS-wife-shot-gun-bought-gift.html

And yet if you look at worldwide statistics you'll find that actually, only 5% of people survive being shot in the head.

If i said "most people survive being shot in the head" i'd be lying.
If i said "some people survive being shot in the head" i'd be telling the truth.

Those two sentences are very nearly identical, with just ONE letter different in fact, and yet they have a totally different meaning.  This is what "marketeers" rely on to dupe stupid people into believing what they say................
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod