Lithium-Ion chargers (Somewhat off subject) and MORE

[Cameron Smith]

Thanks for the links on your post. Great reading.

 I like this one http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=209187
in this thread the numerous Fires caused using Lithium products that the
author could find were listed. Hard to ignore that list.

 After 2plus years after my fire I am using Polys with Great success in
my Foamies. I sure would NOT recommend them to beginners UNLESS they 1st
can read warning labels & follow them. I would say the AMA &
Manufactures are doing a better job with education to the dangers. I
believe we should not trust the AMA or the suppliers to do all the
Education. We must take this to our local levels.  

 Days ago the defendant in my civil case looks like he took an
uncontested 250.000PLUS dollar judgment. Didn't even respond to the
courts. Just changed his company name slightly. Dropping the Plus in the
name & a new Incorporation. Went from the Leader in the Lithium Ion
business to the New Leader in the battery business. I only say this to
you so YOU, as a consumer can have the facts on some of these guys. Not
just neat color ads. There R&D was done at others expense. NO-I repeat
NO Li-Ion Warnings existed when I received my packs & chargers. I don't
even think they knew the down sides of what he was doing.

 Today most of the failures I hear of are User induced. But regardless
of who is at fault. DO NOT CHARGE UNATTENDED! USE THE RIGHT CHARGER. Set
at the right cell count. And ALL the other warnings the RESPONSIBLE
Manufactures & AMA offer. REMEMBER THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE FUN!

-----Original Message-----
From: discussion-request at nsrca.org [mailto:discussion-request at nsrca.org]
On Behalf Of Adam Glatt
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 5:31 PM
To: discussion at nsrca.org
Subject: Re: Lithium-Ion chargers (Somewhat off subject) and MORE

Richard Strickland wrote:

> I've been doing a little research and I'm sure liking Tanic's 
> individual cell tap approach for balancing and EASILY checking 
> condition--I think my next charger will be one that does multiple 
> individual cells--anyone make one?  I've gone WAY past thinking this 
> is going to be economical to start--but there are certainly ways to 
> minimize the problems and maximize the usage of the equipment.  
> Someone was talking about the bearings in the motors shooting craps 
> after 100 flights or so--How about seals?  When you think about a 
> brushless motor--it's basically solid state EXCEPT for the 
> bearings--not really a helluvalot to go wrong with it.  The battery 
> guys are saying 'hundreds' of charges if treated properly; so if you 
> could get 'hundreds' of flights from the motors with virtually 
> absolute reliability--what does that do to the recently mentioned cost

> analysis?  How about the cost of vibration? Lost time when things just

> don't run right?  I'm getting more turned on to this stuff the further

> I get into it.
>  
> Richard S.

Tanic has contracted an EE to design a charger that charges individual 
cells in a tapped battery pack independently, all at once.  Currently 
balancing requires work on the part of the user, and is only done when 
he gets around to it.  This new charger would balance the battery with 
every charge.
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=269638

It sounds like Thunder Power agrees that taps are neccessary: 
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=285184 .  They are 
working on taps and a balancing device.

Poly-quest offers taps with an external balancing circuit that goes 
between the charger and the battery: 
http://www.aircraft-world.com/shopexd.asp?id=2515

As for electric cost, even the most expensive electric motor (Hacker 
C50) is relatively cheap.  It is the batteries, which are both expensive

and short-lived (from the reports I've read over the last year), that 
keeps electric power on top (bottom?) of the price list..
=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to
http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.

=====================================
# To be removed from this list, go to http://www.nsrca.org/discussionA.htm
and follow the instructions.