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

[Bud]

What a 2-hour life GPS device would be useful for? For taking your home from the local mall after buying grosseries? Who in their right mind would use or make such short life devices that are crucial for outdoor activities.

[Rasz]

I'm very curious to get Garmin's take on this G3 GPS test, and the claims of their device getting 1 hr & 43 mins on a new set of Alkalines.
So I emailed their support department:

"The company startup "Batteroo" with the pending product "Batteriser" have published a video in which they claim to test a Garmin Approach G3 using new Alkaline batteries, and they state that it only lasts 1 hour and 52 minutes before it dies. this claim has been widely spread on youtube, their own website, and other parts of the internet.
Can Garmin confirm or refute whether the Approach G3 will only last for under 2 hours on new Alkaline Duracell batteries, and then the batteries would need to be changed?
Thank you for your assistance.
Best Regards,
Sam
PS Here are the relevant links:
(Links to the youtube videos and the batteriser site removed.)

And a picture which shows, they claim, a UL test confirming their test findings that the Approach G3 runs for less than 2 hours on new Alkalines (1 hr 43 mins this time!):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/COGdNPQUcAA8XuS.jpg

I appreciate your comment on this."

It will be interesting to see their take on it. I don't know if this email will make it past the first level support pleb at Garmin, get a form reply, or if it will get elevated. Will report back. I'm taking this step, because if I was involved in the design of the G3, I would want to know if something like this was being circulated. Presumably someone at Garmin wants to know this too.

good idea, did you send it to PR dep too? PR is more suitable for this. Even better if this inquiry was made by someone backed by a wall of readers/subscribers (like Dave ).

[samgab]

Quote from: Rasz on Today at 04:23:06 PM

good idea, did you send it to PR dep too? PR is more suitable for this. Even better if this inquiry was made by someone backed by a wall of readers/subscribers (like Dave ).

I hadn't contacted PR. I don't know how to contact them. I found this:

You can contact our media department via email at: media.relations@garmin.com



EDIT: Grr, what is up with the editor on this thing... Anyway, so I emailed them too. Will await reply.

[Rasz]

tweeting garmin would work too, or bookfacing them

[Halcyon]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries. Most of them will probably have "Busted" next to them.

tweeting garmin would work too, or bookfacing them

Get with the times, everyone's using Friendface these days ;-)

[Wytnucls]

Here is another candidate IC, LTC3526: Start voltage 0.85V, operates down to 0.5V, output voltage 1.6V, 2mmx2mm, 100mA, 80% efficiency.
About 2$ each for 3000 units at Digi-Key.
Lots of versions available, some with lower start voltage, 1.5V out, 1MHz or 2 MHz switching.

[EEVblog]

So that there is no bias I would also love to see The Signal Path let the cat out of the bag on this one but I did not see his name on the list, obviously they have some huge support based on the backers list particularly from the one pictured below.

That Jones David is not me.
Another Batteriser shill has been using "Jones David" in youtube comments on various videos.

[EEVblog]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries. Most of them will probably have "Busted" next to them.

That would be interesting.
They have changed their website and claims so many times it's actually hard to keep up. Most of them are documented here somewhere.

[Wytnucls]

Here is one:

Our technology is really a miniaturization technique that allows us to build the sleeve. We have some IP in some of the IC circuits that are in there, but the key is we’ve been able to miniaturize the boost circuit to a point that no one else has been able to achieve.

BUSTED!

[EEVblog]

And yet ANOTHER claim:  one cannot refute Batteroo's claims without possession of a Batteriser.
Oh contraire, young Ali, we can.

Yes we certainly can in the case of the GPS, because they are making very specific claims about the GPS with standard Alkaline cells. Anyone can reproduce this this, and they have, thus proving, not only beyond all doubt, but demonstrably as a true measured fact, that their claim of the 2 hour operational product life on Alkalines is simply wrong.

[Muttley Snickers]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries. Most of them will probably have "Busted" next to them.

That would be interesting.
They have changed their website and claims so many times it's actually hard to keep up. Most of them are documented here somewhere.

I think the torch test is next on the list and was surprised to see exactly the same lux level in their exaggeration experiment, my lux meter display varies if a mozzie flies over the top.

[jippie]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries.

I could look into making an automatic daily screen capture of the batteriser.com website. I may just I have the tools readily installed on my webserver for that, but it'd need some specific setting up and the like. Raise hands if that's useful.

[samgab]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries.

I could look into making an automatic daily screen capture of the batteriser.com website. I may just I have the tools readily installed on my webserver for that, but it'd need some specific setting up and the like. Raise hands if that's useful.

You can use a service like https://www.changedetection.com to automatically keep track of website changes when they happen, and email you to notify you of any changes. I've added Batteriser.com to my changedetection.com list.

[Godzil]

5Ky, you where asking about the screen technology for the GPS. It's what we call a transflective display, meaning that it is build to be sun readable and can also be used with a backlight.
It's the same sort of screen that Pebble use for the Time, and garmin for their own smartwatch and some other outdoor based GPS.

The main idea is of course as outside there is generally plenty of luminosity (direct sun or not) we can read the screen without the need of a power hungry backlight, but we still keep a backlight in case you want to use the device at night or indoor with poor lighting. So your 17hr test is even wrong because no one would use this specific device with a constant backlight on, I'm sure that without the backlight we could gain, at least, from 2 to 5 more hours of run time.

For the screen there are plenty different type of transflective screen, some of them are coloured with and without a backlight (like the Pebble Time and it seems this garmin GPS) some other are coloured with the backlight, and grayscaled without (like the PixelQi screen)

[jippie]

Is anyone keeping a running list of Batteroo's claims, failures and successes (if they have any)? Would be good to see them summaries.

I could look into making an automatic daily screen capture of the batteriser.com website. I may just I have the tools readily installed on my webserver for that, but it'd need some specific setting up and the like. Raise hands if that's useful.

You can use a service like https://www.changedetection.com to automatically keep track of website changes when they happen, and email you to notify you of any changes. I've added Batteriser.com to my changedetection.com list.

I added that functionality to my local RSS-aggregator. Hadn't thought of adding bitteriser.com yet. OTOH I was thinking actual screenshots rather than textual (or HTML) differences.

[Quarlo Klobrigney]

Did anyone comment on the typo in the UL "testing" screenshot? It says "the batter holder". Would UL release a document with a typo? You be the judge.

[FrankBuss]

Data is beautiful!

So, I got it into excel and started massaging the data and got it into a nice graph.  VERY interesting results.  You can very clearly tell at what point the screen dimmed because it plateaus.  (again, I'm going to make a video today to put on youtube because people need to see this a real apples to apples test like this to show that batteriser is being very dishonest in their claims)

I don't know if I missed it, but please measure how much Wh the garmin device needs at 3V constant voltage for maybe 1 hour. I think we can assume that most modern batteries have more or less the same capacity, or at least they used the best available battery brand for longer runtime. With the Batteriser the GPS device runs for 10 hours, they say in the video. Can't be compared to the 17 hours without the batteriser, because of the dimmed screen after some hours, but it is easy to calculate the (average) efficiency of the boost converter, if we know how much energy it needs. This would be a useful number, because then we could say, for any device which operates down to 1.1V or 1V, where the battery is nearly discharged, that it would last x% less time than with the batterieser. The number would be independant of the device, because with the constant voltage, most devices become constant current devices (when running). But might vary for lower/higher current.

[Galenbo]

...It will be interesting to see their take on it. I don't know if this email will make it past the first level support pleb at Garmin, get a form reply, or if it will get elevated. Will report back. I'm taking this step, because if I was involved in the design of the G3, I would want to know if something like this was being circulated. Presumably someone at Garmin wants to know this too.

I expect, If passed the first barrier, an answer like this: Garmin user terms and conditions doesn't include the use of these devices, warranty will be void.

[Galenbo]

Batteroo/Brad Jones/Batteriser/Ali RPV/David Parish/... comes with some new data:
I'm nearly addicted to his style.

[FrankBuss]

I'm nearly addicted to his style.

It is boring and sad, written by an insecure person, who does this with an anonymous account (which of course is not anonymous anymore, if someone gets a subpoena because someone decided that he insulted or threatened too much). He doesn't have technical arguments.

[Galenbo]

I'm nearly addicted to his style.

It is boring and sad, written by an insecure person, who does this with an anonymous account (which of course is not anonymous anymore, if someone gets a subpoena because someone decided that he insulted or threatened too much). He doesn't have technical arguments.

You fucking retard, you dont'know anything about it, you are payed by the industry of...

Sorry, I'm really getting into his style :-)

[firewalker]

They really thought that no one would buy the specific GPS unit and make the same test? Are they so naive?

Alexander.

[firewalker]

Batteroo/Brad Jones/Batteriser/Ali RPV/David Parish/... comes with some new data:
I'm nearly addicted to his style.

On what video are those comments?

Alexander.

[Fungus]

They really thought that no one would buy the specific GPS unit and make the same test? Are they so naive?

The world of "teenage bloggers" seems quite alien to them, yes.

I'm sure they're used to dealing with other people in suits whose eyes glaze over as soon as you start talking about power efficiency curves. People checking the facts has come as a big shock.

[NoItAint]

When I buy a product, if there's one with UL trademark label, and one without, I always go for the UL Label.  I purely though it was about safety considerations.   If it instead means that a company can pass some contrived test to UL labs and it past the contrived test then this makes me rather sick to my stomach.

If true, it will totally change the way I buy gear.