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

[Kean]

Why fast tracked? That GPS jig could be two years old for all we know.

Because they've only just shown this "report".  Surely if they had such a report it would have been featured heavily in the campaign.

[Kean]

I'd have though that a reputable test house like UL would include more details in test reports.Like date of test, tester name, site where test was conducted.
Maybe it's on other pages (buy you'd expect pages to be numbered), in which case why only publish one page?

Agreed, an official test report would typically have all that and photos of the test setup, and quite possibly info on any equipment used (e.g. stop watch) and when it was last calibrated 
(maybe they want to keep some info confidential, but that just isn't appropriate in this instance - they have the burden of proof)

[Kean]

I just read in your other posts that your auto-tapping device might have OK'd that backlight warning message - but if it did, wouldn't the backlight have been disabled at that point?

It doesn't disable it, it just doesn't run at "full brightness".

This appears to be Batteroo's criteria for terminating the test. When they say "the screen dimmed" they don't mean it went black, it just went down a notch.

Thanks, my mistake.

[LabSpokane]

I hope no one is using a stop watch to do this test.  All one has to do is log the voltage.  The voltage will rise as soon as the device shuts off.  Read off the timestamp, done. 

More free consulting for you Bob, enjoy. 

[Fungus]

Why fast tracked? That GPS jig could be two years old for all we know.

Because they've only just shown this "report".  Surely if they had such a report it would have been featured heavily in the campaign.

They might have planned on having it earlier but it only just arrived.

(maybe this is why they extended the IndieGoGo campaign....give them a chance to go around waving this report in people's faces)

[AmmoJammo]

Why fast tracked? That GPS jig could be two years old for all we know.

Because they've only just shown this "report".  Surely if they had such a report it would have been featured heavily in the campaign.

They might have planned on having it earlier but it only just arrived.

(maybe this is why they extended the IndieGoGo campaign....give them a chance to go around waving this report in people's faces)

They only decided they probably should look into it when a member of the public suggested it to them.

At first, they were saying they didn't need any approvals.

[Kean]

I hope no one is using a stop watch to do this test.  All one has to do is log the voltage.  The voltage will rise as soon as the device shuts off.  Read off the timestamp, done. 

The single page report they've shown just mentions "Record the time it took..."
A real test report (and test protocol) would hopefully specify how to measure the time.  For someone who knows nothing about the expected results, they wouldn't know if it was to be measured in nanoseconds or light-years!

[LabSpokane]

Why fast tracked? That GPS jig could be two years old for all we know.

Because they've only just shown this "report".  Surely if they had such a report it would have been featured heavily in the campaign.

They might have planned on having it earlier but it only just arrived.

(maybe this is why they extended the IndieGoGo campaign....give them a chance to go around waving this report in people's faces)

They extended the campaign because they need cash, badly.  If they had gotten the orders they had planned from major retailers, they could have used those as collateral for all the components and tooling they will have to pony up for.  That didn't happen.  Worse, it seems that SK Telecom is pissed off and just packed Batteroo's Board of Directors with their own people.  And that UL report isn't for you and me.  It's for SK Telecom, and for the retail channel partners that just walked. 

Batteroo just put themselves into the same trap a lot of small electronics companies do.  They always request quotes using fluffed up volumes, which give unrealistic BOM costs.  When the orders actually arrive, the volumes are lower, much lower than planned, and the pricing ends up on a much higher tier.  The client will try to order based on the high volume pricing, but smart CMs will generally not fall for that trap.  Worse yet, they have a custom clip, inductor, and IC, none of which are useful to the CM if Batteroo disappears.  So the CM is going to make Batteroo pony up for that inventory up front. 

Batteroo is really in a jam right now.  If they were smart, really smart, they'd refund the IGG backers right now.  I have no idea how they can ship at this point without losing money. 

[free_electron]

has anyone looked at building such a thing ?

i did some sleuthing and there is this picture i found

looking for boost converters in that package and the current needed , the only two chips that come close to this are the analog devices ADP1607 and semtech SC121 . all others are too low current.

356K and 1 meg in the feedback gives 1.4 volts output voltage for this circuit .. package fits their design ...

i think we have a winner.

maybe time for a little building of this thing and trying it out ?

[timofonic]

I'll hit the 3 hour mark in 9 minutes and the thing is still going and the backlight hasn't even dimmed yet.  It's currently at 2.63v under load.  In their video, theirs supposedly completely died before it got to the 2 hour mark.  Their graph also shows a drop in current at about 1 hr 40 min, which I'd assume is the screen dimming at 2.6v.  That means they started the test with a not-so-fresh battery considering mine is about to hit 3 hours and still hasn't dimmed yet.   

EDIT: I forgot to mention, agilent's benchvue software limits datalogs to 1 hour each if you have the "free" version (paid one is $200).  Those cheap bastards.  I would've been better off using the same arduino that's controlling the servo to datalog to an SD card 

Is your hardware Sigrok compatible? It could be a good alternative.

I had it set to Alkaline and I never saw the brightness message even after the four hours, but since I have the servo hit the screen right where that "ok" button is (intentionally), I never saw it.  It didn't appear to have dimmed yet, however.  When testing with my bench power supply it dimmed at 1.3v per cell, and when I stopped last night, it was at 1.275v per cell, so I'm not sure if perhaps it just hadn't triggered the warning yet or not, but the message matches the one on their video (which you can somewhat read if you pause it at the right time) when it does appear.  I just got a fresh pair started and since it's early and I don't work tomorrow, this test will go until the GPS shuts itself off.  (and I installed an older version of the Agilent DMM software that doesn't have a time limit so I shouldn't have to hit start every hour this time.  Will post video/results when I'm done so people can see how BS their marketing videos really are.

Thanks heaps for all your testing. Would it be possible to take a clear photo of that message that comes up about the Alaline batteries, so we know verbatim what it is actually saying there. I have the gist of it, but I'd like to see exactly what the message is. Cheers! EDIT: Don't worry about that, I found the post in here where the message is quoted verbatim. Never mind!

To everyone:
I recommend having a good look at this chap HKJ's website here:
http://lygte-info.dk/info/batteryEnergyAtLowVoltage%20UK.html

He does excellent testing of flashlights, chargers, DMMs, and cells (Alkaline, NiMH, and Li-ion).
The page I linked is where he checks how much energy really is left in Alkaline cells (He uses Duracell Plus Power), when under various constant power loads as the voltage decreases. The results are very interesting. I like all of HKJ's tests. He's very thorough, and seems to use proper scientific method. He's a member of flashlight forums like CPF, but I'm not sure if he's around on this forum. I hope he chimes in though if he is on this forum!
Anyway, I hope he doesn't mind, but I'll show a couple of his result charts and tables below, but I really recommend checking the full website article linked above.




And the overall results of testing:

Does he know about Batteriser? Please invite him to this forum thread

Lastly, this "report" excerpt appears to be Photoshopped.  The UL logo looks like it was copied off somewhere else, the white background is different that the white background of this "report."  If this really was excerpted from the real report, the entire white background would have the same tint. 

Oh, and by the way Bob, you spelled "battery" wrong.   I'm pretty certain the UL uses spell check.

They might have just done that until the UL paperwork arrives in the post.

Maybe someone should inform UL about this.

Who knows, maybe this scam involve false claims about UL testing the product. This could make them even more shameful than right now and UL would do anything to save their reputation if this company cares about it.

[samgab]

Hey, here's a challenge.
Let's take bets on what off-the-shelf step-up dc-dc converter IC they've used in this thing?

It has to be in a tiny package, has to operate down to 0.6V Input, has to be able to output 1.6V, and has to have good current handling capabilities, and really good efficiency even at low input voltage, plus it must be available in large quantities, and must be very cheap...

I can't figure it out, but I thought something like this: http://cds.linear.com/docs/en/datasheet/35392fc.pdf
Although that doesn't meet ALL of the requirements. I think the package may be too big, and it can't handle enough current.

[firewalker]

has anyone looked at building such a thing ?

i did some sleuthing and there is this picture i found

looking for boost converters in that package and the current needed , the only two chips that come close to this are the analog devices ADP1607 and semtech SC121 . all others are too low current.

356K and 1 meg in the feedback gives 1.4 volts output voltage for this circuit .. package fits their design ...

i think we have a winner.

maybe time for a little building of this thing and trying it out ?

If I remember correctly they stated to have designed their own silicon.

Alexander.

[samgab]

...Does he know about Batteriser? Please invite him to this forum thread

Yeah, he knows something about it, because he comments on it at the bottom of the webpage of his I linked to with the low voltage testing of Alkaline cells, and because there was some superficial discussion of it on the CPF forums, but I'm not sure if he's aware of the whole débâcle.

[Kean]

looking for boost converters in that package and the current needed , the only two chips that come close to this are the analog devices ADP1607 and semtech SC121 . all others are too low current.

Both of those are specified for 1.8V minimum output, and 0.8V or 0.7V minimum inputs respectively (with even higher minimum startup voltages).
Performance graphs also indicate much lower output currents, with the SC121 only specced to 250mA out in certain conditions, and on a single cell ADP1607 is about the same.

Not that I would put it past these guys either running the device outside guaranteed specification, or fudging the figures.  I believe the 1.8V output does correlate with some details in the patent.
But as mentioned by firewalker, they did state they have their own silicon ( )

[firewalker]

@5ky. What firmware your device run? The message is contained to the firmware ApproachG5_WebUpdater__370.gcd.

Alexander.
 .

[samgab]

...If I remember correctly they stated to have designed their own silicon.

Alexander.

There's no way. The costs would be prohibitive for such a small scale operation. The person claiming they made their own silicon is that lunatic who's been saying he isn't associated with them and has been all over youtube and the various forums posting all kinds of rubbish, and he clearly has no knowledge of electronics at all. Either he is a student who is a friend of the son of the CEO, or he's a person in an office somewhere who's been charged with viral marketing and is making a horrendous hash of it. Either way, I doubt there's any custom IC on this thing. A custom PCB and a custom shell with a jellybean IC, some capacitors, and some resistors is it.
Look at the schematic underneath the prototype:


I see C1, C2, R1, R2, L1, and U1. That's about it. I bet U1 is off-the-shelf.

[EEVblog]

Unless I missed it, where is the model of the GPS specified in the test?
To have a report that doesn't specify the exact model used seems crazy.

[Barny]

It looks like the sock puppets of Batteriser / Battero are active again at the comment section of the debunk-video.

[EEVblog]

Copy of the UL "report"
UL Project Number:4787059213

[EEVblog]

It looks like the sock puppets of Batteriser / Battero are active again at the comment section of the debunk-video.

Yup, "Jones David". How original. Joined Sep 1st.
Blocked.

[Kean]

I found the comment by Bob Roohparvar on IGG about the custom IC - it was in relation to a future rechargeable battery model.
(ignore the highlight, that was just the search term I used after expanding all the comments)

[EEVblog]

I'm about to hit 7 hour mark and the GPS is still going in alkaline mode and the loaded voltage is at 2.49v.  They HAD to have stopped their test when the screen dimmed and called that "stopped working".

Nope, they claim very clearly "shutting down" with further clarification that the "GPS unit shuts down completely"

[PeterL]

I found the comment by Bob Roohparvar on IGG about the custom IC - it was in relation to a future rechargeable battery model.
(ignore the highlight, that was just the search term I used after expanding all the comments)

He says customized IC, not custom.
My guess is that they just want a bare die, which is not standard and thus 'customized'.

[AmmoJammo]

I'm about to hit 7 hour mark and the GPS is still going in alkaline mode and the loaded voltage is at 2.49v.  They HAD to have stopped their test when the screen dimmed and called that "stopped working".

Nope, they claim very clearly "shutting down" with further clarification that the "GPS unit shuts down completely"

On the video, I don't think they did... they said it "stopped functioning"

They didn't claim the low battery cut off was activated, or that the batteries were depleted.

[5ky]

@5ky. What firmware your device run? The message is contained to the firmware ApproachG5_WebUpdater__370.gcd.

Alexander.
 .

Not sure but I'll check after the test is done.

By the way, the GPS unit is still going.  It's current at 2.40v at 9 hr 57 min.  I'm going to laugh if this passes their batterised "UL" test