You mean minutes, not hours, surely ?
With the above information, you could have dozens, if not hundreds of non-engineering people able to reproduce these tests - and that is going to have far more sway in the broader community than (the perceived) bunch of nerdy engineers strutting around their labs going "hurrumph". He who shall not be named has already fired a broadside in this direction, quoting a technical description in a public environment and calling out "Who understood that?".
Giving the general public things they understand is essential - and giving them the means to see for themselves will show them that electrical engineers are not trying to hide anything.
We have been using sound engineering principles to prove the Batteriser will not perform as claimed. It convinces no one but other engineers which already know the Batetriser claims are BS.
The product test are the most important thing to do.
I'm using the one song repeated on a loop over and over at fixed volume into the same headphones. A very repeatable test from a discharge point of view.
Of course not, but it proves to Joe Average the product claims are BS.
Someone on IGG has already seen Frank's train video and immediately wanted their money back from Batteroo.
Is it just me that wants to see these things tested using some proper equipment, and without putting them in them in a load of random battery powered devices?
I just ran the MuVo MP3 player overnight with the Batteriser on a new cell and got 267 hrs compared to 314 hrs for a fresh cell, or -15%
Very similar result to Frank's -17.9%
And the battery had enough juice left afterwards to recover to 1.36V and work on full brightness in Lumintop Tool AAA torch.
http://www.lumintop.com/tool-aaa.html
Also, the Thrunite torch is STILL going at 15 hours!
Yet another spectacular failure of the Batteriser.You mean minutes, not hours, surely ?
What we need to do now is reverse engineer the Thrunite torch boost converter and create our own EEVBlogeriser because, evidently, whatever magical smoke is powering it is superior
Nope, HOURS. It just finally died (in a brief flash of light) and it lasted 16hrs 55min.
I have timelapse footage and 2nd cam commentary of the entire thing.
I just watched Daves latest live stream of the Bateroo testing in the trains. It wasn't until Dave was wrapping up and he mentioned testing the Batteroo in an active device, which I take it was the MP3 test, and a passive device which I presume is the train that it dawned on me that in order to light the LED on the front of the train there must have been some sort of active circuitry in the - passive - train to allow a AAA battery to light an LED.
Samgab, regarding your edit - that is what I was wondering too, what is the definition of active?
I am wondering if any type of switching power supply whether it be buck or in this case boost would be considered as active, stepping up the 1.5 VDC from the battery to the LEDs forward voltage of approximately 3 V could be considered as active.
It would be also interesting how much a sleeve will drain the battery without a toy.
The sleeve might be beneficial on something like a travel electric shaver (Remington 2xAA) for instance, where performance is more important than longevity.
Toy train test complete. Full video up on EEVblog in the coming hours. Batteroo were watching the testing live on Youtube BTW! (they contacted me, see other thread)
Over 2000 people watched this testing live!, so no funny business.
169 minutes and 508 laps without Batetriser
94 minutes and 351 laps with Batteriser
3 minutes and 10 extra laps on the "dead" battery with the Batteriser (Just under 2% extra life based on laps)
And as bonus, using the dead battery that was discharged WITH the Batteriser from new got an extra 5 laps after resting for several minutes.
Horrible result (for the Batteriser)
Full train testing video
Inside the train.
As expected just a reversing switch and a bulb for the headlight. Classic passive device.