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

[timb]

Batteroo isn't even an impossible thing... Members of this very forum have made tiny boost converters on tiny round PCBs that fit on the end of a AA battery!

It's not impossible to make a small boost converter.  It's not impossible for that to add some performance under some circumstances.  But that's not what Batteroo claimed.  They claimed that they could take a dead battery that was otherwise headed for the trash heap, and extract four times as much energy out of it as that battery had delivered during its working lifetime.

That's impossible.  Furthermore, they said it would work at any level of current draw.

Batteroo's problem is they over hyped the performance of the device, so now they need some expensive custom IC instead of an off the shelf chip from Linear or TI...

It's not a question of efficiency.  Today's dead batteries simply don't have enough remaining energy in them in order to live up to those claims, no matter how efficiently one tries to extract that energy.  So an expensive custom IC isn't going to help. 

Saying the device just needs a more efficient custom IC is like the perpetual motion free energy slimeballs saying that they've got a machine that works very well, but it just needs a slightly better lubrication system or a smoother bearing before they can put it into production.  If the principle were sound, they wouldn't need to tweak every last half-percent of efficiency out of it.  But if the energy isn't there to begin with, it's not going to work even if you could somehow achieve 100% efficiency.

You totally misinterpreted what I said.

My point was, basically, the hardware itself (a boost converter that fits on a AA battery) is completely possible, what they claim it can do isn't.

I never said anything about efficiency. What I said was, to get the 500mA+ current draw they claim isn't possible with an off the shelf boost converter of that size. If they would have stuck to a more reasonable claim, they could have used an off the shelf IC and have shipped by now.

In essence, I'm saying that, had they stuck to reasonable figures about what the device could do, nobody would have taken issue with it and it certainly would have been possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't see how my post has anything to do with free energy nuts...

[amspire]

I never said anything about efficiency. What I said was, to get the 500mA+ current draw they claim isn't possible with an off the shelf boost converter of that size. If they would have stuck to a more reasonable claim, they could have used an off the shelf IC and have shipped by now.

I am not sure how you can know this for sure. There are a number of Asian switching converter companies that do not appear on Digikey/Mouser/etc. They often do deals directly with manufacturers rather then distributors and they often make devices optimised for one particular job. I did once play with some fairly impressive Seiko converters. It is not technically impossible to have a high current output ability at a low input voltage if the regulator chip has an on-board voltage booster so it can adequately drive the output mosfets. I cannot see a chip that can deliver 1A at 1.5V out at 0.7v in as being in any way technically impossible, but I think most manufacturers would just say why bother? - if you are draining 2A plus from a flat battery to provide 1A out, the battery voltage is going to drop like a stone.

[AG6QR]

I never said anything about efficiency. What I said was, to get the 500mA+ current draw they claim isn't possible with an off the shelf boost converter of that size. If they would have stuck to a more reasonable claim, they could have used an off the shelf IC and have shipped by now.

In essence, I'm saying that, had they stuck to reasonable figures about what the device could do, nobody would have taken issue with it and it certainly would have been possible. Nothing more, nothing less.

I don't see how my post has anything to do with free energy nuts...

Maybe YOU didn't make any claims about efficiency, but they certainly did, and that was the real claim that got the press and potential customers all excited.  They said you're throwing away 80% of a battery's energy every time you toss a dead battery in the trash, only getting 20% of what's in the battery.  And they said their device would recover that remaining 80%, thus giving you five times the battery life you're currently getting.  See Dave's video at the beginning of this thread.  They've since toned down the claim, but only a little.  Instead of saying that EVERY single battery has 80% of its capacity left when it's thrown away, they now say "Devices only tap into 20% of a battery's energy before it tells you that the battery is "dead".  Batteroo taps into the other 80% that is unused...INSTANTLY!"  That is the quote that's featured first on the front of the batteroo.co website.  That is their big marketing pitch aimed at people who don't necessarily know what a mA is.

The range of current draws over which the device could function was a very minor point in comparison to the fact that it was supposed to extract all this energy that everyone is currently throwing in the trash.  You are correct of course, that they made a false claim that their boost converter could function at any level of current draw which an AA battery could support.  But that false claim was peanuts compared to their big false claim.

When they claim you can get a bunch of energy for free, but the energy really isn't there to be harvested, that puts them in the category of free energy nuts, in my book.

[EEVblog]

I am not sure how you can know this for sure. There are a number of Asian switching converter companies that do not appear on Digikey/Mouser/etc. They often do deals directly with manufacturers rather then distributors and they often make devices optimised for one particular job.

In the case of the Batteriser it's in fact the exact opposite of "one particular job", because you don't know what load this converter will be used on. The specs for this converter need to be the hardest technically possible. i.e. absolute minimal loss over the entire output operating current range in a ridiculously tiny space.

I cannot see a chip that can deliver 1A at 1.5V out at 0.7v in as being in any way technically impossible, but I think most manufacturers would just say why bother? - if you are draining 2A plus from a flat battery to provide 1A out, the battery voltage is going to drop like a stone.

Which is why they will never ever release a characteristic graph for it.
Doesn't matter though, once someone with any clue gets one, it's a few hours work.

[Fungus]

Saying the device just needs a more efficient custom IC is like the perpetual motion free energy slimeballs saying that they've got a machine that works very well, but it just needs a slightly better lubrication system or a smoother bearing before they can put it into production.

Yep. I love how their machines are always built out of salvaged/junk parts.

It gives them a permanent excuse for 'not working properly today'. 

[Fungus]

Doesn't matter though, once someone with any clue gets one, it's a few hours work.

Their entire business plan depends on no customer owning the product.   

When they claim you can get a bunch of energy for free, but the energy really isn't there to be harvested, that puts them in the category of free energy nuts, in my book.

Either that, or "lying thieves".

[EEVblog]

Maybe YOU didn't make any claims about efficiency, but they certainly did, and that was the real claim that got the press and potential customers all excited.  They said you're throwing away 80% of a battery's energy every time you toss a dead battery in the trash, only getting 20% of what's in the battery.  And they said their device would recover that remaining 80%, thus giving you five times the battery life you're currently getting.  See Dave's video at the beginning of this thread.  They've since toned down the claim, but only a little.  Instead of saying that EVERY single battery has 80% of its capacity left when it's thrown away, they now say "Devices only tap into 20% of a battery's energy before it tells you that the battery is "dead".  Batteroo taps into the other 80% that is unused...INSTANTLY!"  That is the quote that's featured first on the front of the batteroo.co website.  That is their big marketing pitch aimed at people who don't necessarily know what a mA is.

It just occurred to me that we don't need the Batteriser in order to bust their banner claim of 80% energy unused completely and thoroughly.
Of course it's already been done with the cutoff voltage measurements, but in their insane world they dispute that.
What about getting a bunch of typical products, connecting a new battery via a power monitor and logging how much energy is used until flat. Then simulate that same load (roughly) on the "flat" battery and see how much energy is left in it?

Although it's much easier to do without any gear when the Batteriser arrive, just time how long products last and that's it.

[Fungus]

What about getting a bunch of typical products, connecting a new battery via a power monitor and logging how much energy is used until flat. Then simulate that same load (roughly) on the "flat" battery and see how much energy is left in it?

Sounds expensive/complicated and there's lots of ways for Bob to weasel out (because you chose the devices).

Plan B:
Is there any way you could grab a bunch of batteries from one of those battery recycling bins?

(ask them nicely of course and promise to return them all afterwards)

Maybe set up a fake "Battery Recycling Point" somewhere and test whatever people throw in it.

[EEVblog]

Sounds expensive/complicated and there's lots of ways for Bob to weasel out.
Is there any way you could grab a bunch of batteries from one of those battery recycling bins?
(ask them nicely of course and promise to return them all afterwards)
Maybe set up a fake "Battery Recycling Point" somewhere and see what people throw in it.

Bob has already demonstrably misrepresented data from one of those surveys.
The problem with that is you have no history of the battery. People could have mistakingly thrown out new batteries, or simply changed them out deliberately before the low battery mark. Heck, even I do that. For example, if I'm going on a shoot and need guaranteed performance on my wireless mic, I'm going to swap the batteries out for fresh ones before hand so I have a known run time.

[Fungus]

Is there any way you could grab a bunch of batteries from one of those battery recycling bins?

Bob has already demonstrably misrepresented data from one of those surveys.

I guess the survey might be true - people do throw away good batteries.

Those people don't care about Batteriser though and it will skew the results.

(which is what Bob did, he claimed the results were due to the devices not the device owners).

[EEVblog]

I guess the survey might be true - people do throw away good batteries.
Those people don't care about Batteriser though and it will skew the results.
(which is what Bob did, he claimed the results were due to the devices not the device owners).

Correct on all 3 points.
For point #2, the Batteriser is the exact opposite to what people want. They want a known run time, and not only does the Batteriser not deliver that, but it rendered the battery gauge and/or low battery detector in every single product utterly useless. This undeniable fact alone make the Batteriser unappealing to a vast number of people. Sadly, they are relying on these people not realising this problem until their product instantly goes from 100% battery to 0% at the worst possible time, at which point they'll throw it in the bin in a rage.

[amspire]

I am not sure how you can know this for sure. There are a number of Asian switching converter companies that do not appear on Digikey/Mouser/etc. They often do deals directly with manufacturers rather then distributors and they often make devices optimised for one particular job.

In the case of the Batteriser it's in fact the exact opposite of "one particular job", because you don't know what load this converter will be used on. The specs for this converter need to be the hardest technically possible. i.e. absolute minimal loss over the entire output operating current range in a ridiculously tiny space.

The way Seiko achieved a wide range of efficiency was to use pulse width modulation for about 10% to 100% power and pulse frequency modulation below that. They were able to get about 90% plus efficiency from 0.1% load to 100% load, and 75% at 0.01% load.

The space though is a big problem. You need a high frequency (say 1.5MHz) to get a tiny inductor that can still carry several amps, but going for high currents means high gate capacitance on the mosfet switches, and so you get increased switching losses. Basically, every time you double the peak output current, the gate capacitance increases by a factor of 4 or more. High gate capacitance and high frequencies don't mix.

I cannot see a chip that can deliver 1A at 1.5V out at 0.7v in as being in any way technically impossible, but I think most manufacturers would just say why bother? - if you are draining 2A plus from a flat battery to provide 1A out, the battery voltage is going to drop like a stone.

Which is why they will never ever release a characteristic graph for it.
Doesn't matter though, once someone with any clue gets one, it's a few hours work.

This is the juggling act Batteroo has. There is no way that these first products are within the Indiegogo budget (they did say that manufacturing turned out to be more difficult then an iPhone), and the VC investors don't care about Indiegogo - they only care about landing deals with supermarkets, or finding a big company that wants to buy the design for $100 million or more. They might even currently be using the initial samples of an IC repackaged by a manufacturer to fit their design, but cannot afford a production run from the IC manufacturer without a big deal signed. If Batteroo is doing the potting by hand in the US, it could explain why the devices couldn't be distributed from China.

Batteries are used in so many different ways. It means there would be so many tests you could do on the Batteriser that it would be a total miracle if you didn't find some big problems even if the designers did a good job.

[ccs46]

But IMHO this is serious, they are perfectly capable of ruining Dave's reputation if he doesn't take any countermeasures.

 

Yeah Dave's Fine Art Career is totally over... 

[drussell]

(they did say that manufacturing turned out to be more difficult then an iPhone)

...charger... than the iPhone charger that Bob insinuates that he single-handedly designed for Apple.

The iPhone itself is almost infinitely more complex to design and miniaturize everything...

[FrankBuss]

(they did say that manufacturing turned out to be more difficult then an iPhone)

...charger... than the iPhone charger that Bob insinuates that he single-handedly designed for Apple.

Was it this charger?

http://bgr.com/2014/06/13/iphone-charger-recall-europe/

[AmmoJammo]

Zombie batteries 

[drussell]

(they did say that manufacturing turned out to be more difficult then an iPhone)

...charger... than the iPhone charger that Bob insinuates that he single-handedly designed for Apple.

Was it this charger?

http://bgr.com/2014/06/13/iphone-charger-recall-europe/

There were several different Apple chargers that were deemed unsafe and recalled throughout the world.

It would be quite ironic but not surprising, if any of those were ones where Bob was involved with the design. 

[Fungus]

Batteriser instruction sheet...

[SL4P]

How long before Batteroo simply fall on their sword, and say 'the miniaturisation was harder than we thought...'
Notwithstanding all the performance claims and shipping lies - Boob is stuffed.
All he can be thankful for, is that VC investors don't read the tech forums.
We could change that (!)

[Fungus]

(from YiuKei's language via google translate)

"Toothbrush. I spent about three weeks into aspects of the two tablets of electric start, Chai Chai, we immediately set up a ' Brush many times. Wow... really impressed on the canal, it seems like the new motor. This crowdfunding something delicious to anything come in the mail would think that it is a scam, to the day before yesterday I suddenly received open watch feel good flow, a try. Really good work."

Anybody know how much current one of those toothbrushes draws?

[LabSpokane]

Maybe YOU didn't make any claims about efficiency, but they certainly did, and that was the real claim that got the press and potential customers all excited.  They said you're throwing away 80% of a battery's energy every time you toss a dead battery in the trash, only getting 20% of what's in the battery.  And they said their device would recover that remaining 80%, thus giving you five times the battery life you're currently getting.  See Dave's video at the beginning of this thread.  They've since toned down the claim, but only a little.  Instead of saying that EVERY single battery has 80% of its capacity left when it's thrown away, they now say "Devices only tap into 20% of a battery's energy before it tells you that the battery is "dead".  Batteroo taps into the other 80% that is unused...INSTANTLY!"  That is the quote that's featured first on the front of the batteroo.co website.  That is their big marketing pitch aimed at people who don't necessarily know what a mA is.

It just occurred to me that we don't need the Batteriser in order to bust their banner claim of 80% energy unused completely and thoroughly.
Of course it's already been done with the cutoff voltage measurements, but in their insane world they dispute that.
What about getting a bunch of typical products, connecting a new battery via a power monitor and logging how much energy is used until flat. Then simulate that same load (roughly) on the "flat" battery and see how much energy is left in it?

Although it's much easier to do without any gear when the Batteriser arrive, just time how long products last and that's it.

Sigh...  That just would be agonizingly tedious, and quite honestly pointless given the responses to this point.

[quad]

Edit: n/m

[Fungus]

Anybody know how much current one of those toothbrushes draws?

According to the internet the Colgate 360 uses AAA batteries.

They don't look like AAA Batterisers to me. 

[quad]

They don't look like AAA Batterisers to me. 

In the packaging box it looks like he bought a couple of packets - one of those packets is marked AAA

[Fungus]

They don't look like AAA Batterisers to me. 

In the packaging box it looks like he bought a couple of packets - one of those packets is marked AAA

There's some AAA versions? 

Interesting...