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

[apis]

I don't think the Patent System today works anything like it did in the past.

Patents are SO complex and technical now, and there are so many that get pushed through the pipeline, that reviewers likely skim through them and grant many that shouldn't be. The patent system obviously wants to keep the revenue stream flowing, and so it works more like a "library system" where ideas get time-stamped. When and if there is ever a violation found, a lawsuit occurs or whatever, the lawyers pour through and that's when the actual patent infringement and nitty-gritty technicalities get brought out and discussed. I highly doubt that a patent clerk will have the time or energy or knowledge to carry out the amount of very technically detailed work needed to decide if a patent should even be patented. They are probably just making sure it follows a certain "format" and that the money is paid for filing, and there are no obvious major holes.

http://www.wired.com/2015/01/fixing-broken-patent-system/

Yes, all patent applications are granted unless there's something obviously wrong with them. Like over unity devices (but over unity devices get patented every now and then anyway). According to patent proponents that's fine though. If there is something wrong with a patent you should challenge it in court and the court will determine if it is valid or not...

One of the many problems with this is that most courts are nationalistic and appear to be biased toward domestic companies. But there are other problems as well, such as small companies not having the resources to get into court fights for example (that's why patent trolls are so successful I suppose).

Patents are supposed to protect the small inventor from having his invention stolen by the big giants. In practice the giants patent everything they can think of and thereby create a very difficult barrier for newcomers to enter an existing market niche. Want to develop a new mobile phone? Prepare to licence a hundred patents or so first, or challenge the big companies patents in court...

[timofonic]

Nope. People should be protected against false claims and snake-oil products.
(And yes, there are laws...)

Yes true. Unfortunately we are not in the position here on EEVBlog to be the police. I don't think Dave wants to necessarily police the entire world of crappy electronics products either.

I see it!

Dave L. Jones: International General Director of International Electronics Products Police.

I would see too much guilty people out there. The prisons would be intensive reeducation camps to learn EE properly and not be released until they master it.

[tree]

I see it!

Dave L. Jones: International General Director of International Electronics Products Police.

I would see too much guilty people out there. The prisons would be intensive reeducation camps to learn EE properly and not be released until they master it.

Reeducation camps, ehh?

I like it!

[lpickup]

Edit: is that me or their own patent show that the batteriser will nearly halves the battery life

It's "FIG 7: shows actual measurements that illustrate the advantages of the various embodiments."
For me it does not display what the title says, but I'm always wrong so.. Go figure..

No.  They are simply not showing the "unregulated" case (although they do list the times where the voltage dropped below 1.39V and 1.35V--the voltage they claim that many devices stop working at at the very beginning of their patent (strange that they felt the need to give this business justification--that's really not necessary for the patent)

[0003] Some electronic equipment that use disposable batteries, such as AA batteries, are designed to stop operating when the battery voltage drops by 10% or so. That means when the voltage of an AA battery drops to about 1.4V or 1.35V, the battery is no longer useable by the equipment and has to be replaced with a fresh battery.

From the detailed description of Fig 7:

The amount of time it takes for the batteries to reach 1.39V, which is where a lot of electronic equipment stop operating, are listed.

If you were to draw a line from V=1.39V down to the X-axis you would get the times listed in the table at the bottom.

What's really interesting to me is that while they have repeatedly claimed that the Batteriser will function at a terminal voltage of 0.5V (maybe I'm just not remembering it correctly), Fig 7 clearly shows that at least with whatever prototype they used for this data, that it only functioned down to about 1.3V or so.. Huh?  Wow!

The Panasonic battery when used in conjunction with a regulator, according to embodiments of the invention, took 27.9 hours before it stopped providing 1.5V, and the Sony battery when used with a regulator took 32 hours before its stopped providing 1.5V.

Well, I guess it could continue to "function", just not provide 1.5V, but strange that the curves they showed in Fig 7 dropped to 0V once it reached that threshold.  If I take that literally, it means the Batteriser would actually shut off when it reached this point, and devices that are well-designed that do work down to 1.1 or 1.0V would in fact have shorter lifetimes (is that what you were getting at maybe?)

[Godzil]

Yes that's basically my point

[edy]

So in the graph above, I see the regulated voltage at 1.80 V.... last for about 30 hours on average for all 3 batteries, then cut off to 0V? And that's testing the batteries under a load that drew 50mA? Meanwhile, the other curves show voltage for the "unregulated" batteries gradually declining until about 50-60 hours? Also under the same current draw of 50mA.

According to the curves, it looks like the "Regulated" circuits only last half as long. Sure they provide a stable 1.8 V for the entire duration, at 50mA (which is not much of a current draw either) and then die abruptly. The other curves drop down to about 1.0V at about 50 hours and then start to die abruptly.

I really don't understand the "table" under the graph showing 1.39V, 1.35V, Regulated, Multiple/1.4 and Multiple/1.35 for the 3 batteries. Can anyone explain what those numbers mean? It would have been nice if they used units somewhere in the table. Are they looking at time? Is that in hours? And what does "3 times" mean, an average? And what is "multiple" and 1.4 and 1.35? 

If I were to guess.... The key "trick" to their argument lies in that the "CUTOFF" voltage used for 1.35V let's say, you can see the unregulated curves for the normal batteries at 50mA current draw cross below the 1.35v threshold at about 15 hours. Meanwhile, the "regulated" lines continue until about 30 hours. So you can argue that the regulated batteries last 2x longer if your device cutoff was 1.35v. But if you made your threshold by drawing a horizontal line across the graph at 1.1V, you would have closer to 50 hours out of each battery at 50mA.

I think all the Batteriser does is just make your device run like it has brand new batteries, but for a shorter time. Great if you want nice bright flashlights for half the time. Yes, a bright flashlight when you need it, is better than a dim flashlight. An electric battery-powered toothbrush running at 100% is much better than one that is slowly dying and barely moving. In these situations, you want OPTIMAL VOLTAGE because the product you are using works much better for your needs at that moment.

You usually don't use a flashlight all the time. It sits in the closet and toothbrush sits in the bathroom most of the day. You just want it to turn on, work like it's got BRAND NEW batteries for those 2-3 minutes that you need it, and then turn it off. So even though the batteries may actually work for FEWER hours in those devices, it has more utility for you to be able to have optimal performance for those fewer hours than have crappy performance for many more hours.

Imagine a battery-operated electric shaver. I'd rather have one that runs fast and cuts efficiently and does the job quickly, then string it along (even though the motor will still run) and have it rip out my hairs slowly and painfully and make the experience longer. I think that is what the Batteriser may be going for, and only in a very specific set of devices that have this type of usage behaviour where optimal voltage is required for optimal utility, and where lower voltages will still allow the device to run but the usefulness quickly diminishes. However, the Batteriser marketing goes completely against this notion, but if they market it properly that is the only real benefit I can see.

[Davey_Jonez]

morons.
The device will show it can no longer display the back-light or it will shut down. That is a fail for either mode. With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.
Ah yes, then the comeback is UL is paid so they do what you want. Really, are you all that retarded. They are in business to make money, they charge to test a product. I do not know of any labs that test a company product for free. You cannot buy the result.
I have dealt with UL many times over the course of my career in Silicon Valley. They are very rigid in terms of reporting results.

And, genius, if you use an off the shelf boost converter you will likely see a different result. That is not their product. You may only see 2 or 3X. Keep digging. They win, you lose. Do something constructive. Like little children stomping their feet.
If you want to find bad things you will. If you want to find good things, you will. Just constantly negative. You cannot stop them. They have investors that have done due diligence. Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

[edy]

morons.
The device will show it can no longer display the back-light or it will shut down. That is a fail for either mode. With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.
Ah yes, then the comeback is UL is paid so they do what you want. Really, are you all that retarded. They are in business to make money, they charge to test a product. I do not know of any labs that test a company product for free. You cannot buy the result.
I have dealt with UL many times over the course of my career in Silicon Valley. They are very rigid in terms of reporting results.

And, genius, if you use an off the shelf boost converter you will likely see a different result. That is not their product. You may only see 2 or 3X. Keep digging. They win, you lose. Do something constructive. Like little children stomping their feet.
If you want to find bad things you will. If you want to find good things, you will. Just constantly negative. You cannot stop them. They have investors that have done due diligence. Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

That is the whole point, isn't it. The Batteriser extends "optimal" voltage for longer than a regular battery, but then it will abruptly cut off. A regular battery will slowly decay and run sub-optimal for a much longer time. The use-case scenario then becomes, which do you prefer?

Like the flashlight, electric battery toothbrush and battery-shaver examples. Nobody wants a slowly working shaver or toothbrush. Nobody wants a dim flashlight, even if it will last many more hours. It is more of an "all or nothing" situation for the device to be useful to the user.

However, the GPS will continue to function WITHOUT a backlight for many hours. Users in the forum have already confirmed that. The question is, if you absolute positively MUST have that backlight work (say you are playing Golf in the dark) then the Batteriser will win in that situation.... while someone else who doesn't have the Batteriser, will have a GPS last much longer but there would be no backlight, so you wouldn't be able to use that GPS very well.

At the end of the day, regardless of whether we are right or wrong about all of this, Batteriser and it's fans have done nothing to increase their credibility to the Electronic Engineer community with any real science. Videos, theories, patents, all of it is being picked apart by multiple people from multiple continents who all studied in Universities and work in the profession. There is no collusion going on here. We are discussing it objectively and backing our arguments with science and experiment.

[LabSpokane]

morons.
The device will show it can no longer display the back-light or it will shut down. That is a fail for either mode. With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.

Feel free to produce the report with the testing conditions.  So far, we've seen nothing meaningful out of Batteroo to support its (your?) claims.  If you paid UL for a test, there is an accompanying test report. 

While you're at it, produce this "FCC Certification" that is being alleged and was obtained in less than 1 week. 

Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

The flashlight test is a later claim.  The original claim is that the Batteriser would make all things powered by alkalines last 800% longer.  Now, you have had to modify the claim, and that claim is, that the flashlight operates for a much shorter time with the Batteriser, but it's better when it does. 

The claims keep shifting. 

Then there is the claim of devices leaving 80% of the charge left in the batteries when reporting 0% charge remaining.  You cite the Apple wireless keyboard and trackpad.  Both claims are demonstrably false.  Yet, you still keep making these claims. 

[dcac]

In the patent fig 11-13 they show (theoretical) operation of their regulator down to 0.8V.

Those three diagrams have x-axis in minutes, and the battery voltage reaches 0.8V after 45-52 min which (I think) roughly correspond to a 1.5A load for a AA battery.

Fig 13 show three stages of regulation/boosting:
1st a bypass phase when the battery voltage is over 1.45V.
2nd a phase where the regulator voltage ramps down from 1.5V to 1.35V as the battery’s voltage is falling from 1.45V to 1.0V.
3rd a constant voltage phase where the regulator outputs 1.35V until the battery drops below 0.8V.

In their patent claims they seem to “only” claim operation down to 70% of initial battery voltage, or about 1.05V.

[lpickup]

I really don't understand the "table" under the graph showing 1.39V, 1.35V, Regulated, Multiple/1.4 and Multiple/1.35 for the 3 batteries. Can anyone explain what those numbers mean? It would have been nice if they used units somewhere in the table. Are they looking at time? Is that in hours? And what does "3 times" mean, an average? And what is "multiple" and 1.4 and 1.35? 

Let's pick one row as an example (Panasonic -- solid line).

The first column of the table describes the time at which the unregulated voltage falls below 1.39V (at which point the patent claims that "some" devices will cut-out and fail).  Follow the unregulated solid line to 1.39V, draw a line down to the X-axis:  6.3 hours.  Second column is the same, except they assume cut-out at 1.35V.  Third column is just the time at which the regulated solid line drops from 1.8V to 0V (27.9 hours).  Fourth column (they've switched to 1.4V, but they probably mean 1.39V) is just column 3 divided by column 1, indicating how many times longer the battery lasts with the regulator than without (assuming 1.39/1.4V cut-out).  Same for column 5 except it's column 3 divided by column 2.

Maybe we should do them a favor and include columns for more common cut-out voltages of 1.1V and 1.0V.  The "multiple" factors I get are 1.1V: 0.61 and 10V: 0.56

[Halcyon]

What is the use of announcing that you will be announcing "great news" some time soon? If you know you have "great news", why not just share it? This isn't the first time they announce the announcement of some time soon great news.

They need to fabricate the great news first... it's just taking them a bit longer to make something up that sounds half-plausible. :-)

morons.

I see we finally have the "Batteroo Fan Page" on this blog. Welcome :-) You might learn a thing or two... feel free to report that back to Batteroo Inc. Just keep it civil.

[edy]

The flashlight test is a later claim.  The original claim is that the Batteriser would make all things powered by alkalines last 800% longer.  Now, you have had to modify the claim, and that claim is, that the flashlight operates for a much shorter time with the Batteriser, but it's better when it does. 

The claims keep shifting. 

Then there is the claim of devices leaving 80% of the charge left in the batteries when reporting 0% charge remaining.  You cite the Apple wireless keyboard and trackpad.  Both claims are demonstrably false.  Yet, you still keep making these claims.

Exactly. I see it now... The Batteriser marketing team went on a drug-induced hallucinogenic hyperbole-fest when they were coming up with how great it was. Where did they get those numbers? How did it go from 800% to 80% to 8x to 5x, and so on? I will never know.

But what seems to be happening here is NOTHING of the sort of claims that Batteriser was misleading backers with up to and continuing on with this IndieGogo campaign. Not only is the claim shifting, it was already schizophrenic from the time it started? Nobody has a clue what is actually being claimed, only that it is grossly overstated.

I get it now. The Batteriser saves batteries because people throw them out when their flashlight goes dim. A dim flashlight is useless, even if it will run dim for another 10 hours. I get it. Your flashlight is only bright for 2 hours, and then the next 10 hours it is just not going to be good enough. Throw in a Batteriser and you will get 6 hours of bright light, and then it will die completely to darkness. A miracle! You have used your battery 3x longer than otherwise, since a person would have chucked the batteries away after only 2 hours otherwise.

That scenario (and other specific use-cases) need to be spelled out clearly to people who are buying this product. Not a generalized statement that applies to all devices, and all situations.

[tree]

morons.
The device will show it can no longer display the back-light or it will shut down. That is a fail for either mode. With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.
Ah yes, then the comeback is UL is paid so they do what you want. Really, are you all that retarded. They are in business to make money, they charge to test a product. I do not know of any labs that test a company product for free. You cannot buy the result.
I have dealt with UL many times over the course of my career in Silicon Valley. They are very rigid in terms of reporting results.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UL_(safety_organization)

UL is a safety organization to test your product to make sure it doesn't blow up. They don't test its performance. Sure, they'll stress test the thing and let it do what it was designed to do, but they don't care about logging battery data and timing it.

[Muttley Snickers]

Please correct me if I am wrong but based on what I have read and for your average Joe in the street are they claiming that Joe can put batteries in his flashlight and run it for a number of hours until it dims, lets say 5 hours and then add a sleeve and get another 35 hours or thereabouts usable running time out of those already discharged batteries, I find it extraordinary and difficult to comprehend regardless of the smarts involved, and perhaps these people may as well.

https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees/consumer-guarantees

[edy]

Please correct me if I am wrong but based on what I have read and for your average Joe in the street are they claiming that Joe can put batteries in his flashlight and run it for a number of hours until it dims, lets say 5 hours and then add a sleeve and get another 35 hours or thereabouts usable running time out of those already discharged batteries, I find it extraordinary and difficult to comprehend regardless of the smarts involved, and perhaps these people may as well.

https://www.accc.gov.au/consumers/consumer-rights-guarantees/consumer-guarantees

It's all "wishy-washy".... What is considered "dim"? What is the average Joe going to do? What do they expect from the performance of their flashlight? I can see the average Joe turning on their flashlight one day and thinking "crap it is too dim for me to use for what I need", so they slap on the Batteriser sleeves and get maybe another 10 minutes out of the batteries before they die completely. So the average Joe thinks "wow I just sucked more juice out of my dim batteries" and thinks the Batterisers were a savior.

They are not going to get another 35 hours... The marketing B.S. makes it sound like that, but they won't. But it will get them out of a jam until they get a fresh pair of batteries, and that may be enough psychological motivation to make people think these are so great, when they are not.

[EEVblog]

morons.
The device will show it can no longer display the back-light or it will shut down. That is a fail for either mode.

Not, it's not, it's how the product is designed to operate!
When Alkaline battery mode is selected the firmware purposely puts up that message at a certain battery voltage and switches off the bakclight, because the product is not optimally designed for Alklalines.

With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.

It was only about a month ago that it is claimed Batteriser set up this GPS test due to customer feedback of what tests they like to see. Do you really expect us to believe that UL have tested the product on this GPS and have provided a report within that one month?

And, genius, if you use an off the shelf boost converter you will likely see a different result. That is not their product. You may only see 2 or 3X.

If Batterisers performance is so leading edge, why have they not publish the efficiency performance envelope curve to prove it? That would shut everyone up.

Keep digging. They win, you lose. Do something constructive. Like little children stomping their feet.

So who are you exactly? Do you work for Batteriser?

Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

LOL. Who uses an incandescent light bulb torch any more 

[Delta]

Surely I'm not the only one who finds it hillarious that there are supposed "fans" of a cheapo consumer electronics product that isn't even available?

Yes, you see fan site and fan videos for sports teams, bands, films etc, but unreleased electronics products?  Aye, right! 😂😂😂

[EEVblog]

Surely I'm not the only one who finds it hillarious that there are supposed "fans" of a cheapo consumer electronics product that isn't even available?
Yes, you see fan site and fan videos for sports teams, bands, films etc, but unreleased electronics products?  Aye, right! 😂😂😂

That's because they are setup by the marketing companies. It's a common technique called Astroturfing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

[EEVblog]

Please correct me if I am wrong but based on what I have read and for your average Joe in the street are they claiming that Joe can put batteries in his flashlight and run it for a number of hours until it dims, lets say 5 hours and then add a sleeve and get another 35 hours or thereabouts usable running time out of those already discharged batteries, I find it extraordinary and difficult to comprehend regardless of the smarts involved, and perhaps these people may as well.

It seems like Batteriser are backing themselves into a corner where the only decent usage case they find is an old school incandescent flashlight. 
Where are the tests on the real products they claimed? The remote controls, the game controllers, etc. They can't even get the GPS test right, they completely goofed that.

[edy]

Please correct me if I am wrong but based on what I have read and for your average Joe in the street are they claiming that Joe can put batteries in his flashlight and run it for a number of hours until it dims, lets say 5 hours and then add a sleeve and get another 35 hours or thereabouts usable running time out of those already discharged batteries, I find it extraordinary and difficult to comprehend regardless of the smarts involved, and perhaps these people may as well.

It seems like Batteriser are backing themselves into a corner where the only decent usage case they find is an old school incandescent flashlight. 
Where are the tests on the real products they claimed? The remote controls, the game controllers, etc. They can't even get the GPS test right, they completely goofed that.

It may work in those cheap battery-powered throw-away kids toothbrushes. Usually the motor keeps working but slugging along for way too long but parents get lazy or forget to replace the batteries, they just keep using them. But yeah, very limited usage and the claims are totally misleading and exaggerated. Good observation... who would actually be a "fan" of an unreleased product unless they are Batteroo or someone associated with them.

[Delta]

Surely I'm not the only one who finds it hillarious that there are supposed "fans" of a cheapo consumer electronics product that isn't even available?
Yes, you see fan site and fan videos for sports teams, bands, films etc, but unreleased electronics products?  Aye, right! 😂😂😂

That's because they are setup by the marketing companies. It's a common technique called Astroturfing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

Aye, I'm familiar with astroturfing, I was more pointing out how monumentally stupid they are to expect people to believe that they have "fans"!

[edy]

I have a better idea for Batteriser to market....

Make a battery with a beeper and bluetooth module in it, so you can insert it into your TV remote control. When you lose the remote and can't find it, use your PHONE to connect to it and activate the beeper so you can hear where it is and find it.

Quick... better patent that! 

[MikeW]

Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

LOL. Who uses an incandescent light bulb torch any more 

Quite a lot of people. Not to say I am in any way trying to help batteriser here but just saying there are a huge number of people behind the technogoly curve.

A lot of people on this forum seem to think their knowledge is common knowledge and it's really not the case.

[FrankBuss]

With the their (custom) boost converter it runs almost 6X longer. UL has verified it in their lab.

Would be interesting to see the report. I've helped developing a product which was UL tested and they didn't care about functionality, as others here noted, they only test that it doesn't burn the house down if there is a short circuit etc. and they are good at it. The product required some rework because of theoretical problems with a coin cell which was in the product. What does the AA-Batteriser do, if it gets shorted?

Try an incandescent flashlight. Will it stay brighter longer with a highly efficient boost converter? very simple. try it.

An incandescent flashlight wouldn't be usable as long with a boost converter than without one. Better usable for an hour and at the end you can see that it gets darker, than usable for half an hour and suddenly it turns off.