Subject:
|
Re: Rechargeable batteries and the RCX
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Sun, 14 Jul 2002 16:04:47 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
452 times
|
| |
|
|
In article
<73718FFFA963C045BD5B74B2F9B1EBA515B778@gcgpo1.greenfieldgroup.com>,
lego-robotics@crynwr.com (Rob Limbaugh) wrote:
> Aren't rechargeable alkaline supposed to be better than NiMH?
Depends. Rechargeable alkaline have a higher nominal voltage, but also
higher internal resistance than NiMH. Under light load the alkalines
will provide a higher voltage for a longer period of time. Under heavy
load, they provide less effective power than NiMH. Someone (I'm sorry
that I forgot who) did some thorough testing with the RCX a while back
and the results were good enough to convince me to switch over to NiMH.
>
> Don't NiMH batteries lose their charge just "sitting around" if not placed in
> a trickle charger?
Yes, that's the Achille's Heel of NiMH - the shelf life isn't great. If
you use your RCX once a week you probably won't notice the problem. If
it sits on a shelf for months at a time, then you might be happier with
rechargeable alkaline.
I have a hybrid approach - mostly due to the fact that I already had
numerous sets of rechargeable alkalines before starting to buy NiMH. I
leave rechargeable alkalines in most of my RCX's most of the time
(especially since they tend to go for months at a time unused). When
I'm working on a project, as soon as the batteries are getting weak, I
pop out the rechargeable alkalines (to charge them), and replace with
some NiMH that I keep in a charger.
Dave Baum
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
4 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
|
|
|
|
