Subject:
|
Re: Battery Tests
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 12 Apr 2001 17:45:55 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Tim Hatch <vbq@myrealbox=nomorespam=.com>
|
Viewed:
|
1782 times
|
| |
|
|
> I have used Titaniums in my RCX, and they perform noticeably *worse* than • regular
> Energizer. I have had great success and battery life using Rayovac • Alkalines, running
> motors for 2 hours with no problem. I think that Duracells performed a
little worse.
I had similar results with a CD player and E2's. Standard NiCds lasted
longer than the E2's!
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Gombos <gombos_2000@yahoo.com>
To: <lego-robotics@crynwr.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 3:38 AM
Subject: Re: Battery Tests
>
>
> "Micah J. Mabelitini" wrote:
>
> > Ahui Herrera wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone done any battery tests to determine which brand of battery • last
> > > longer in an RCX? I have a demo at work early next month that will be • an
> > > 8-hour show in which people can come up to our booth and play with • several
> > > robots we have via the LEGO remote control and push buttons. I am • wondering
> > > how many batteries I need to purchase and if there is a differnce in • the
> > > following:
> > >
> > > 1) Duracel
> > > 2) Engerizer
> > > 3) Engerizer Titaium
> > > 4) Engerizer Photo Litium
> > >
> > > My gut tells me to go with Engerizer Titaium as I have used this brand • for
> > > many years now and have been happy with them. Duracel suscks IMOP. I • have
> > > never put any batteries in my RCX as I have been lucky to only use the • AC
> > > adapter and not worry the battery hogs that I have heard the RCXs are. • Any
> > > help would be appreciated.
> >
> > Although I've made no empirical tests, I've had the best results with
> > Duracell Ultra in the RCX. I've never used Energizer Titaniums in an RCX
> > before, but I have used them in a pair of Motorola T6300 two-way FRS
> > radios, and noticed no significant difference between them and standard • Energizers.
> >
>
> I have used Titaniums in my RCX, and they perform noticeably *worse* than • regular
> Energizer. I have had great success and battery life using Rayovac • Alkalines, running
> motors for 2 hours with no problem. I think that Duracells performed a • little worse.
>
> Andy
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Micah J. Mabelitini - LUGNET #918 - accutron@kih.net
> > The University of Kentucky - SECC Middlesboro ASRC
> > http://www.users.kih.net/~micahx/brickdreams/
> > http://www.users.kih.net/~micahx/rcxbug/
>
> --
> See my Visual Interface for leJOS at http://lvi.sourceforge.net
>
>
>
>
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Battery Tests
|
| (...) That can happen - but the NiCd's are lower voltage (1.2 versus 1.5) - so no all battery operated devices are happy with them. Also, NiCd's have to be treated carefully and 'deep-discharged' or else they succumb to the 'memory effect' which (...) (25 years ago, 15-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Battery Tests
|
| (...) I have used Titaniums in my RCX, and they perform noticeably *worse* than regular Energizer. I have had great success and battery life using Rayovac Alkalines, running motors for 2 hours with no problem. I think that Duracells performed a (...) (25 years ago, 11-Apr-01, to lugnet.robotics)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
