HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Oct 26, 2012, 09:20 AM
Registered User
So. Cal.
Joined Oct 2004
8,039 Posts
As I understand, he is using a Hyperion charger, which have not been validated to be consistent with the other measurement means that myself, Wayne, and John have extensive experience with. Consequently, this data should viewed accordingly.

Mark
mrforsyth is online now Find More Posts by mrforsyth
RCG Plus Member
Reply With Quote
Sign up now
to remove ads between posts
Old Oct 26, 2012, 09:46 AM
Battery Puffer
Orange, California, United States
Joined Nov 2001
1,064 Posts
Im not trying to harp on you Sailr but i find 1. Mohm or lower hard to believe. When the boat guys have reported there packs puffed after a couple of uses. You go to all the forums just raving about these pack but nobody else has claimed such low resistance. Can you send a pack to a non biased tester like (Mark Forsyth if he's willing ) a pack to test. I think maybe your testing equipment might be suspect but would be good to know if your packs are this good.

Mark
MarkF is offline Find More Posts by MarkF
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 03:23 PM
Registered User
Land O' Lakes, FL
Joined Aug 2003
898 Posts
Hyperion 720 duo charger
sailr is offline Find More Posts by sailr
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 03:24 PM
Registered User
Land O' Lakes, FL
Joined Aug 2003
898 Posts
maybe the charger isn't that accurate. Could be. It's the only way I have to measure them. I'm not a battery techie guru like some on here. Next time I'm charging, I'll check again.
sailr is offline Find More Posts by sailr
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 03:25 PM
Registered User
Land O' Lakes, FL
Joined Aug 2003
898 Posts
I used to be one of those BOAT guys. Believe me, FE Boaters can blow up the best packs in the world. NOTHING pulls the amps like boats and one little jump up in prop size can doom the packs very quickly.
sailr is offline Find More Posts by sailr
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 07:29 PM
Registered User
Massachussets
Joined Nov 2005
243 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sailr View Post
I have been spot checking my HAIYIN packs IR during charging. So far, NONE has exceeded 1.0! When compared with my hyperions and various Hobbyking packs, the HAIYINs are MUCH lower in internal resistance. Just one more reason I have totally switched to HAIYIN for all new pack purchases.


Why is Sailr posting the IR data in this thread? It is off topic.
wingster is offline Find More Posts by wingster
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 26, 2012, 07:36 PM
That's a funny word
NE Ohio
Joined Apr 2003
3,686 Posts
It could be my fault. http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showp...&postcount=425
gulio is offline Find More Posts by gulio
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 12:46 PM
Registered User
Land O' Lakes, FL
Joined Aug 2003
898 Posts
somebody posted a link with the IR data. I followed it. My bad.
sailr is offline Find More Posts by sailr
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 01:04 PM
Registered User
DonA's Avatar
United States, CA, Placerville
Joined Feb 2006
644 Posts
Wayne, received my lipo tester a few days ago and love how it works. Now I have one device that shows me consistent IR values from cell to cell and pack to pack. However, I have question about using the tester on packs that are greater than 6S (ie 10S) and wired as a single pack with 2 balancing leads. Most of my 10S packs are 2 5S packs wired in series with 2 Deans connectors but some are actual 10S packs, or 2 5S packs wired in series with only one Deans connector and and the positive and negative leads between the packs soldered together.

Can I make an adapter to tap off the positive and negative ends of the balancing taps to read pack voltage and pack IR? Will the balancing leads carry enough current for the pack IR calculation without damaging the balancing leads? Or, what happens if I use the 10S pack lead to power the tester since I am mainly interested in individual cell IR values?

thanks
Don
DonA is offline Find More Posts by DonA
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 03:39 PM
Registered User
Rugby, UK
Joined Feb 2007
867 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonA View Post
Wayne, received my lipo tester a few days ago and love how it works. Now I have one device that shows me consistent IR values from cell to cell and pack to pack. However, I have question about using the tester on packs that are greater than 6S (ie 10S) and wired as a single pack with 2 balancing leads. Most of my 10S packs are 2 5S packs wired in series with 2 Deans connectors but some are actual 10S packs, or 2 5S packs wired in series with only one Deans connector and and the positive and negative leads between the packs soldered together.

Can I make an adapter to tap off the positive and negative ends of the balancing taps to read pack voltage and pack IR? Will the balancing leads carry enough current for the pack IR calculation without damaging the balancing leads? Or, what happens if I use the 10S pack lead to power the tester since I am mainly interested in individual cell IR values?

thanks
Don
Don,

Glad you are pleased with the meter.
The overiding requirement is that you do not subject the meter to more than a 6S voltage across the power connections. Your query suggests that you are aware of this but I am confirming it in case other users have the same requirement. IF YOU APPLY MORE THAN 6 CELLS (25.6V) ACROSS THE POWER LEADS AND TRY TO TAKE A READING, IT WILL DAMAGE THE UNIT.

You can make up an adapter to enable you to take the current pulse from the balance connectors and it will not cause any damage to the meter or the pack provided that you respect the 6S max limit between the power +ve and -ve.

With this setup you can then measure any cell between the power connections except the cells adjacent to the power connections. As you are taking current through balance connections,then those connections cannot be used as measuring points as the connector resistance will included.

You can still use any balance connection between these two points as a Kelvin connection so that you can accurately measure any cell except the 'end' cells.

Hope that is clear; if not let me know and I will try to post a sketch circuit.

You are right to concentrate on the cell values, particularly with high capacity (ie low IR ) lipos as the connector resistance is significant, and variable, and will distort 'PACK' readings.

Wayne
Wayne Giles is online now Find More Posts by Wayne Giles
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 05:26 PM
Just flitting about!!
bigroger's Avatar
Joined Aug 2011
2,637 Posts
Guys,
did some comparison resting with a suspect 60C 6s5000 packs yesterday comparing IR on iCharger to Powerlab6 measurements with some interesting data.

With the suspect packs; iCharger data at 22degC and 3.85V per cell storage voltage got numbers as follows.
6,6,6,6,6,6 mOhm.
Then immediately tested on PLB6 and got;
2.7, 2.7, 2.5, 2.4, 2.7, 3.1 mOhm.

Then tested a Gens Ace 30C 4s4000 packs that measures on iCharger as;
2,2,2,2
and tested on PLB6; 1.8, 2.0, 2.0, 1.5 mOhm.

These were tested side by side at same temperature and conditions.

Once thing to note is that PLB6 requires a charger to be applied to the battery to generate an IR number, but the obvious question is that the GensAce packs were pretty consistent between the two chargers where's these 'other' packs showed substantial difference between both chargers.

I'm at a loss as to what to trust in terms of the IR measurements. Do I send the 60C6s5000 packs back to the vendor? I am looking for the absolute peak in performance out of these larger packs.
bigroger is offline Find More Posts by bigroger
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 05:35 PM
Registered User
So. Cal.
Joined Oct 2004
8,039 Posts
At what charge rate was the PL6 set when the measurement was made? Reason I ask is that since it measures IR during a charge cycle, there can be a heating effect that will have a tendency to show more optimistic IR numbers. This heating effect is greater at higher charge rates and with poorer quality packs with higher internal resistance. It's for this reason that I tend to place more trust in an IR measurement device that tests during a short discharge pulse. iChargers and Wayne Giles' ESR Meter employ this method.

Also, it's been my observation that the PowerLab rest period during which recovered voltage is measured may not be sufficiently long to allow lesser quality packs to completely recover. This voltage measurement serves as the basis for IR calculation. Consequently, this will also produce optimistic numbers in poorer quality packs.

All data that I have taken over the past several years shows 100% correlation between the data gained from my iChargers and actual discharge curves. It is also 100% consistent with observed performance in my models. As such, I personally would place more faith in the data gained from your iCharger.

Do you know of anyone who has an ESR Meter? It would be a nice additional data point. A discharge test with a CBA or similar device would also tell you a lot.

Mark
mrforsyth is online now Find More Posts by mrforsyth
RCG Plus Member
Last edited by mrforsyth; Oct 27, 2012 at 05:51 PM. Reason: Correct spelling
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2012, 05:52 PM
Just flitting about!!
bigroger's Avatar
Joined Aug 2011
2,637 Posts
Thanks Mark,
no access to an ESR meter unfortunately.

Charge rate on the PLB6 was set at 5Amps. We tried only 1Amp but we waited over 20 minutes and the PLB6 still hadn't set up the IR reading.

These are the packs we spoke about the other day via PM system that I tested yesterday at the club on my buddies PLB6.

Interesting to note, these same high capacity packs when tested at the vendors office on their PLB6 (not my actual packs but the same capacity and ratings off their shelf) gave IR readings of 1.5-2.0mOhm and that was with zero cycles. My packs have been cycled 5 times so far down to 3.75v and up to 4.20 volts on the iCharger at 1C each time.

I suspect I could get better results off Nanotech 65C 6s5000 packs for sure.
bigroger is offline Find More Posts by bigroger
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2012, 01:26 AM
ancora imparo
jj604's Avatar
Melbourne, Australia
Joined Jul 2005
6,434 Posts
Updated Hyperion charger

Folks, Hyperion have just released a firmware update for their chargers which has an interesting new feature:

- Internal Resistance per Cell can now be viewed (under Balancer, while charging)

To date I haven't recommended Hyperions for IR comparison because mine seem to have been consistently lower in values than the iCharger, PL8 or Wayne's meter.

We also thought that to date they only measured pack IR.

I will have a look and see how the new firmware does as far as IR values go. Hyperion have changed the IR algorithm in the past and the values obtained from current chargers are different from older models. Maybe this time it is closer to what the other methods get.

John
jj604 is offline Find More Posts by jj604
Last edited by jj604; Oct 28, 2012 at 02:07 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2012, 06:01 AM
ancora imparo
jj604's Avatar
Melbourne, Australia
Joined Jul 2005
6,434 Posts
Preliminary thoughts on the new Hyperion firmware

This is just my first impressions and based on one test on one battery so all the usual cautions apply.

Using new firmware 5.82 on a 720i Super Duo 3, Software suite 2012.10.24

I charged an almost new Haiyin 4S 2650mAh 40/50C which I had tested a day ago using the previous firmware and also the ESR meter. Temperatures were slightly different. 68F first test 66F second test.

First test:

ESR meter
Cell1 5.44
Cell2 5.20
Cell3 5.88
Cell4 5.44
Cell sum IR 22

Duo pack IR 9 (old firmware)

Second test:

Duo IRs
Cell1 5.2
Cell2 4.8
Cell3 6.5
Cell4 5.3
Duo pack IR 21 (new firmware)

Must say it looks promising. The variations are within experimental variation.

It may be that the revised firmware now gives us another meter that produces realistic IR values. Up till now Hyperion IR's have been significantly lower than other methods - ESR meter, iCharger and PL8. I have seen quoted absurd "less than 1mOhm" values for sub 3000mAh packs when tested with Hyperion chargers.

John
jj604 is offline Find More Posts by jj604
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Product Cell Internal Resistance Meter - more useful than 'C' ratings - Now available. PLD Batteries and Chargers 468 Oct 05, 2012 10:02 PM
Discussion Lipo C-ratings puzzle: what's most important, C-rating or mAh capacity?? Merlin45 Batteries and Chargers 18 Apr 03, 2010 04:45 PM
Idea Proposal for simple lipo performance figures of merit kgfly Batteries and Chargers 8 Oct 29, 2009 05:55 PM
Question What is the formula for lipo discharge amps? C ratings and such? skid_68 Batteries and Chargers 6 Nov 10, 2005 08:10 AM
LiPo "C" Ratings: Useful? RD Blakeslee Batteries and Chargers 121 Mar 17, 2005 10:02 PM